Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Assessment/Junkers Ju 87: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
** Article has been reorged to follow [[WP:Air/PC]] layout. Some text may need to be moved from 1 section to another though. -[[User:Fnlayson|Fnlayson]] ([[User talk:Fnlayson|talk]]) 16:06, 4 September 2009 (UTC) |
** Article has been reorged to follow [[WP:Air/PC]] layout. Some text may need to be moved from 1 section to another though. -[[User:Fnlayson|Fnlayson]] ([[User talk:Fnlayson|talk]]) 16:06, 4 September 2009 (UTC) |
||
***Bizarre opposition since Dihedral was linked to in design section before the GA review. I'll wait for further comment before addressing any major issues. If others think it stands a shot at A-Class I'll give it a go at changing major parts. [[User:Dapi89|Dapi89]] ([[User talk:Dapi89|talk]]) 16:41, 4 September 2009 (UTC) |
***Bizarre opposition since Dihedral was linked to in design section before the GA review. I'll wait for further comment before addressing any major issues. If others think it stands a shot at A-Class I'll give it a go at changing major parts. [[User:Dapi89|Dapi89]] ([[User talk:Dapi89|talk]]) 16:41, 4 September 2009 (UTC) |
||
* I see some problems, mostly vague and potentially confusing descriptions. For example "automatic pull-up dive brakes" in the second paragraph is a rather awkward description for the Askania autopilot and dive-bombing system, and "essentially noise making propellers" is confusing as a description for the infamous "trumpet of Jericho" sirens driven by a small windmill. The term "spatted" is used for the undercarriage of the Ju 87A while, unlike the other Ju 87 models, this actually had [http://www.aviationartstore.com/images/Ju-87_Wilhelm.jpg trousers] instead of spats. The MG 81Z was a not a "dual barrel machine gun" but a twin pair (''Zwilling'') of MG 81 machine guns in a compact twin installation. The description of the models has the B, C and R in a confusing order, the H gets the briefest of mentions, and the K is only mentioned in a footnote -- I admit that it indeed ''is'' a bit obscure. [[User:Mutatis Mutandis|Mutatis Mutandis]] ([[User talk:Mutatis Mutandis|talk]]) 18:25, 5 September 2009 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 18:25, 5 September 2009
This article was recently promoted to GA status. The reviewing editor suggested I should push for FA status, so I thought I would go for A-Class first. Dapi89 (talk) 18:20, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
- Have you requested a copyedit on the article? I have some problem areas, beginning in the second paragraph of the lead section; "easily recognizable" (by whom?), "fixed spatted undercarriage" (or is it its spatted, fixed undercarriage), etc.. I did not review the article for extensive use of technical jargon, but the caption for the photo of the wrecked Ju 87b refers to, "...positive and negative dihedral." While the photo and the caption are obviously intended to highlight something about the aircraft, I can't determine if it is the exposed spar and ribs, or the attachment bolt, or something else. Dihedral is not linked in any of its instances. I will hold my vote in reserve until further review of the article. --Born2flie (talk) 13:54, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
Opposed. Not configured per WP:AIR/PC. Operational history should follow Development and precede Variants in a logical progression of history. Significant justification should be made for varying from the Aircraft project's guidelines. --Born2flie (talk) 14:31, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
- Article has been reorged to follow WP:Air/PC layout. Some text may need to be moved from 1 section to another though. -Fnlayson (talk) 16:06, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
- Bizarre opposition since Dihedral was linked to in design section before the GA review. I'll wait for further comment before addressing any major issues. If others think it stands a shot at A-Class I'll give it a go at changing major parts. Dapi89 (talk) 16:41, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
- Article has been reorged to follow WP:Air/PC layout. Some text may need to be moved from 1 section to another though. -Fnlayson (talk) 16:06, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
- I see some problems, mostly vague and potentially confusing descriptions. For example "automatic pull-up dive brakes" in the second paragraph is a rather awkward description for the Askania autopilot and dive-bombing system, and "essentially noise making propellers" is confusing as a description for the infamous "trumpet of Jericho" sirens driven by a small windmill. The term "spatted" is used for the undercarriage of the Ju 87A while, unlike the other Ju 87 models, this actually had trousers instead of spats. The MG 81Z was a not a "dual barrel machine gun" but a twin pair (Zwilling) of MG 81 machine guns in a compact twin installation. The description of the models has the B, C and R in a confusing order, the H gets the briefest of mentions, and the K is only mentioned in a footnote -- I admit that it indeed is a bit obscure. Mutatis Mutandis (talk) 18:25, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
