Talk:Petlyakov Pe-8/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Ian Rose (talk) 14:04, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

• It is reasonably well written.

  a (prose): b (MoS):

• It is factually accurate and verifiable.

  a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

  The book Air Power by Bill Gunston and others (compilation of various Purnell/Phoebus History of the World Wars titles) claims Tupelev designed the plane and Petlyakov "prepared it for series production" in 1939. Does this gel with any of your sources?

  Both Gunston's Encyclopaedia and Gordon specifically state that the task of meeting the requirement was given to the Tupolev OKB which assigned it to a brigade led by Petlyakov. I've rewritten the statement to clarify things a bit.

• It is broad in its coverage.

  a (major aspects): b (focused):

  I'm not sure the Varients section works; it might be better merging the first para into Design & Development and the rest into Operational History, which could be subdivided into WWII and Post-War as I feel the post-war info should appear chronologically after the wartime history.

  Since John Taylor isn't linked, best describe him, e.g. "military historian John Taylor". Also I assume he is synonymous with the Michael J.H. Taylor in the References - best make the name the same in both instances...

  I have identified him. They appear to be two people, father and son. Jehochman ^Talk 14:34, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

  I've followed Ian's suggestion and merged the Variants section into the others. And deleted the whole PS-42 claim since I haven't actually seen the book in question. Gunston and Gordon make absolutely no mention of any airliner version so I think that Taylor was simply speculating or was confused by the ON versions.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:47, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

• It follows the neutral point of view policy.

  a (fair representation): b (all significant views):

• It is stable.

  No edit wars etc.:

• It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.

  a (tagged and captioned): b (lack of images does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):

  We should have alt text in images.

  I've taken care of this. Jehochman ^Talk 14:24, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

• Overall:

  a Pass/Fail:

  All up very good, if you can respond the the above we should be able to pass soon. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:04, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

I saw this pop up on my watchlist, so I've taken the liberty of butting in. Jehochman ^Talk 14:35, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Satisfied with responses/actions so consider this passed for GA - well done! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 06:58, 29 November 2009 (UTC)