Talk:Project E/GA1

Latest comment: 7 years ago by Peacemaker67 in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

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

Reviewer: Peacemaker67 (talk · contribs) 10:15, 7 March 2017 (UTC)Reply


This article is in pretty good shape. I have a few comments:

Lead

Background

Negotiations

  • link Blue Danube (nuclear weapon) rather than just Blue Danube, which is a dab page
      Done Hawkeye7 (talk) 12:06, 8 March 2017 (UTC)Reply
  • suggest for athe generous offer
      Done Hawkeye7 (talk) 01:00, 11 March 2017 (UTC)Reply
  • suggest The McMahon Act was amended in August 1954 if that is what is meant
      Done Hawkeye7 (talk) 01:00, 11 March 2017 (UTC)Reply
  • V-bomber and V-Bomber is used, I suggest choosing one. I'd also suggest that the term seems to refer only to strategic bombers, not tactical ones, but is also used to refer to all nuclear-capable bombers, including the Canberra, which was not a V-bomber. Perhaps the article should just refer to nuclear-capable bombers up to this point?
    No, the terms refers to bombers with names starting in a V: Valiant, Vulcan and Victor. The first was a sort of interim design. It entered service first, but did not have the desired range. As the Victors and Vulcans became available, it was relegated to the tactical role. Hawkeye7 (talk) 01:00, 11 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

Implementation

Images are ok. That's me done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:02, 11 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

This article is well-written, verifiable using reliable sources, covers the subject well, is neutral and stable, and is illustrated by appropriately license images with appropriate captions. Passing. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:23, 11 March 2017 (UTC)Reply