This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project, participate in relevant discussions, and see lists of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 00:03, December 24, 2024 (JST, Reiwa 6) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indonesia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Indonesia and Indonesia-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IndonesiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndonesiaTemplate:WikiProject IndonesiaIndonesia
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 a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history
what types of aircraft were the Japanese fighter regiments equipped with?
Some combination of Nakajima Ki-43 and Nakajima Ki-44 day fighters, I think. I can't confirm this from online sources, and my go-to source for this kind of thing (an obscure collection of post-war Japanese reports) was destroyed when the ANU Library flooded early this year. I'll try to clarify this ahead of an ACR. Nick-D (talk) 23:24, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Several of its editors are professionally published historians, with their books being very well reviewed. The site has also been extensively used as a reference in published works. The author of the article used here has been a historical consultant to several relevant documentaries and written or contributed to several relevant professionally published works. Nick-D (talk) 23:24, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This article is well-written, verifiable using reliable sources, covers the subject well, is neutral and stable, contains no plagiarism, and is illustrated by appropriately licensed images with appropriate captions. Passing. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:48, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Nick-D: Regarding this [1], the problem is not that it is unsourced, but the distinction makes little sense unless we mention the speific point of the Musi we're talking about. Compare to a sentence like this: "The flight from Berlin takes ___ miles to London and ___ miles to the Thames." If the numbers are different it will be confusing to the reader unless we specify we're talking about a point outside London. HaEr48 (talk) 22:25, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That's a good point - I've clarified the text. It looks like the mines were dropped a fair way downriver from Palembang, but the sources are unfortunately vague on where exactly. Thank you for your excellent edits to the article. Nick-D (talk) 22:29, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
.svg)
