This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Somalia Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Somalia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Somalia 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.SomaliaWikipedia:WikiProject SomaliaTemplate:WikiProject SomaliaWikiProject Somalia Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. United States: Military history Low‑importance 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. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Military history - U.S. military history task force. Military history: African / North America / United States / Post-Cold War 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 Associated task forces: /  African military history task force North American military history task force United States military history task force Post-Cold War task force

While I believe there is merit in the use of the quotes throughout the article, I have tagged the article due to their use as sensational eye-catchers in what should otherwise be a neutral, statement of fact. I think a couple of them could be successfully worked into the article as they provide context and viewpoints, but the way they are currently indented, bolded, and displayed is more akin to how a journal article would portray them, not an academic summary of a historical event. --Slazenger (Contact Me) 07:24, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I believe I have revised the page to be more suitable with Wikipedia's format. I left only two quote blocks in the "Air Strike Phase" section of the article, all others were either removed entirely or worked into the article. Would it be acceptable to leave those two remaining quotes or should I do away with them entirely? Whoopsawa (talk) 05:54, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there @Whoopsawa - I think those quotes still add value. This article may be of some use to you as well as to how best to include the quotes: Wikipedia:Quotations. Article's looking much better now! --Slazenger (Contact Me) 09:01, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]