Talk:Lockheed Martin A-4AR Fightinghawk
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Lockheed Martin A-4AR Fightinghawk article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
.svg) | This article was created or improved during WikiProject Latin America's Latin American and the Caribbean 10,000 Challenge, which started on November 1, 2016, and is ongoing. You can participate! |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
cleanup tag
editI dont know exactly why is here. I think I wrote the article clearly enough. Could someone clarify please ?. If you mean grammar It should be replaced by copyedit --Jor70 23:03, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, I didn't know about the copyedit tag. Fixed. Good article, BTW! - Aerobird 01:39, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
- You're welcome! What do you think about changing the start rating to something up ? --Jor70 01:42, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
- Well it needs a little smoothing - I may work on that, in between the other 821 articles on my watchlist of course - but once that's done B Class is a distinct possibility. - Aerobird 02:18, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you! I appreciated it. Pls tell me if specific information is needed. I have lot of photos too but I think we may have a license issue. --Jor70 14:39, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
- Well it needs a little smoothing - I may work on that, in between the other 821 articles on my watchlist of course - but once that's done B Class is a distinct possibility. - Aerobird 02:18, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
- You're welcome! What do you think about changing the start rating to something up ? --Jor70 01:42, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Remove article
editWhy does this article exist? If we write an article for every A-4-version, no-one will find anything anymore: A-4A, A-4B, A-4C, A-4E, TA-4E, A-4F, TA-4F, A-4G, TA-4G, A-4H, TA-4H, TA-4J, A-4K, TA-4K, A-4KU, TA-4KU, A-4L, A-4M, OA-4M, A-4N, A-4PTM, A-4P, A-4Q, A-4AR, AF-1 (A-4KU), A-4S, TA-4S, A-4SU. Did I miss any? Put it in the A-4-article! --cobatfor 17:05 19 Aug 2008 (UTC)
- "oppose" This is a significantly different variant compared to the one from which it was developed (the A-4M). If all the details for all the Skyhawk's related developments were to be included in the main article, it'd become too extended and potentially confusing for a casual reader. That's why there are other wikiarticles for specific variants of this aircraft (as for example, the A-4S). And as long as these articles are linked from the main A-4 one, it'd be easy to find them!
- If you believe to have good reasons for deleting this article, I'd suggest you to raise your proposal to the "Military Aviation Wikiproject" consideration, so several editors can express their opinions. Kind Regards, DPdH (talk) 07:30, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Not suitable referenced (yet?)
editHi, I've just added the "unreferenced" tag, as the article does not have online citations and references that can help comply with wikiipedia "verifiability" guidelines/policies. Having said that, IMHO the article seems adequate (just needs that improvement). Thanks & regards, DPdH (talk) 07:49, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Lockheed Martin you what?
editIt would only be Lockheed Martin if they were the original manufacturers. Please don't go down the silly Boeing Harrier etc. route.
- LockMart was the prime contractor for the rebuild/upgrade. To my knowledge, McDD/Boeing had nothing to do with that. I've added McDD to the A-4 link in the Lead sentence to make it clear who made the original airframes. - BilCat (talk) 03:06, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
still A-4
editTo truly understand why the A-4 ( and Mirage III) are still the more "capable" jet of the FAA we must first understand what is happening in Argentina. The different civilian goverments who took power since 1983 have a profound ill-feeling against the armed forces , even when they have already gave multiple signs of humiliation against the current political class and greatly transformed themselfs from what they were until the nineties. They are more respected abroad than at home ( see UN sec Ban Ki-moon words this week ). Anyway, back to the point, there were mutliple offers since the 1990s to the FAA .e.g.
- USA for F-16 ( see http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/534/dscagoapc9922311.jpg/ , http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/143/dscagoapc9922312.jpg/ ) Notice that the A-4 were still being delivered
- France ( many times for Mirage F-1 via Spain, Jordania and even theirs and more recently for Mirages 2000s )
- Chinese and Russian offers are not even listen ( except for a few mi-17 surprisingly last year )
The Argentine civilian governments refused to modernize the armed forces, and this is not just aircraft related. The most likely "winners" for the upcoming presidential elections of next october had already announced they will maintain this path — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.232.152.78 (talk) 11:12, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
Wording improvement needed
editThe wording in the last half of "Operational history" doesn't look right. Can an experienced editor please help improve it? Thanks, DPdH (talk) 00:09, 14 May 2017 (UTC)