This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles
This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked
Coverage and accuracy: not checked
Structure: not checked
Grammar and style: not checked
Supporting materials: not checked
To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call:
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 articles
Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I have compromised on the mark nos. Contemporaneously they were properly Shackleton MR Mk. 1 etc. etc. Aircraft of the RAF tending to retain the system used when the aircraft was introduced. Henece it is, strictly speaking / writing, incorrect to label the Shack as MR1 etc., which is the current iteration. If there is a conce3nsus the proper abbreviations can be added, any discussion?.
Dont agree, the long form is not really used even by the RAF and it would be more normal to use MR.1 to be contempary. They have not changed the system the long form is still used on Air Publications it is just the short form that has changed with time. Dont have a problem with MR.1 style in a list article. MilborneOne (talk) 15:36, 17 July 2012 (UTC)Reply