Talk:Bentley BR2

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

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the aircraft engine task force.

Military history: Aviation / British / European / World War I Start‑class

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

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	World War I task force

Bad English?

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The paragraph relating the relationship between the B.R.2 and the Snipe/Salamander grated in all three of its recent incarnations - perhaps less a matter of poor English as clumsy expression (the aircraft was designed around the engine, not the engine for the aircraft) not to mention its being out of place. In a longer article it would have been an important thing to mention in the lead - in a little article like this a single mention in the body is enough - why not under "applications"? Seems logical, at least to my increasingly senile old mind! --Soundofmusicals (talk) 02:29, 5 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Bad English?