This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
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
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
RAF Ripon is within the scope of WikiProject Yorkshire, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Yorkshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page.YorkshireWikipedia:WikiProject YorkshireTemplate:WikiProject YorkshireYorkshire 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 been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I might be wrong, but I think that RFC stations were named after the airfield only thus Ripon, unlike RAF stations, e.g. RAF Ripon. Better titles would be either Ripon (RFC airfield) or RAF Ripon.--Petebutt (talk) 13:26, 16 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
Agreed - I have moved it in what I anticipate to be an uncontroversial move, but who knows, someone may take exception to WP:BOLD. Regards. The joy of all things (talk) 13:59, 16 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
.svg)
