GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: RohG ??· 11:34, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
Nominator: Sp33dyphil
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
The reviewer asked me to provide a second opinion here. I will read the article carefully and fill in my comments below. – Quadell ( talk) 15:33, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
![]() |
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | Very good. |
![]() |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | Infobox and lede are good, "See Also" is appropriate, all similar to the featured Boeing 777 article. |
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
![]() |
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | No problems. |
![]() |
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | No problems |
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. | None detected. |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | All major questions answered. |
![]() |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | Not a problem. |
![]() |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | Not a problem. |
![]() |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | Not a problem. |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
![]() |
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | The only image is correctly tagged and OTRS approved as free. |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | Placement and caption are good. |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. | Passes all criteria. |
These should either be fixed, or you should explain why they would not improve the article.
The only problem I'm currently having is your reluctance to talk about your use of sources. It's a serious problem when editors source a statement with an offline reference that doesn't actually back the statement up. It's a much bigger problem when editors copy text from sources word-for-word, or sentence-for-sentence in close paraphrasing. (Most people who do this don't mean to do anything wrong, but it can still put Wikipedia in legal trouble.)
So, as I asked above, can you tell me whether the offline sources cover the material they where the footnote is? (For instance, can all the information in the first paragraph of "Design and development" be found on page 63 of Gordon?) Can you verify that the article has not been closely paraphrased from the offline sources? I'm willing to trust you, but I need you to tell me. If there are sourcing problems, I can help you fix them.
Once that issue is resolved, this will pass GA status. All the best, – Quadell ( talk) 11:54, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
Thrust-vectoring control (TVC) was the solution. It was the key to ultra-maneuverability that enabled the fighter to remain in the zero-speed/high-alpha mode for three or four seconds (i.e., long enough to get a lock-on and fire a missile) or quickly recover from this mode.
The Sukhoi OKB began initial TVC studies as early as 1983. The Western press then described two-dimensional vectoring nozzles as the best option; however, General Designer Mikhail P. Simonov insisted on using axisymmetric vectoring nozzles. (Later events showed that he was right. Sukhoi did research on both types of nozzles, but the experimental 2-D nozzle suffered from severe technological problems.) SibNIA conducted a series of experiments using scale models to test nozzle operation. By 1985 Sukhoi engineers had a clear picture of the forces generated and work began on thrust-vectoring engines. Thus, by the mid 80s the Soviet Union possessed the know-how to create a TVC fighter.
In 1988 and 1990 Sukhoi began a series of tests with the LL-UV (KS) and LL-UV (PS) test-beds. On these aircraft the vectoring nozzle could only move up and down. The results were generally encouragin& and work proceeded on a TVC version of the TlO-M.
Sp33dyphil " Ad astra" 23:34, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: RohG ??· 11:34, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
Nominator: Sp33dyphil
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
The reviewer asked me to provide a second opinion here. I will read the article carefully and fill in my comments below. – Quadell ( talk) 15:33, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
![]() |
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | Very good. |
![]() |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | Infobox and lede are good, "See Also" is appropriate, all similar to the featured Boeing 777 article. |
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
![]() |
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | No problems. |
![]() |
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | No problems |
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. | None detected. |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | All major questions answered. |
![]() |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | Not a problem. |
![]() |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | Not a problem. |
![]() |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | Not a problem. |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
![]() |
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | The only image is correctly tagged and OTRS approved as free. |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | Placement and caption are good. |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. | Passes all criteria. |
These should either be fixed, or you should explain why they would not improve the article.
The only problem I'm currently having is your reluctance to talk about your use of sources. It's a serious problem when editors source a statement with an offline reference that doesn't actually back the statement up. It's a much bigger problem when editors copy text from sources word-for-word, or sentence-for-sentence in close paraphrasing. (Most people who do this don't mean to do anything wrong, but it can still put Wikipedia in legal trouble.)
So, as I asked above, can you tell me whether the offline sources cover the material they where the footnote is? (For instance, can all the information in the first paragraph of "Design and development" be found on page 63 of Gordon?) Can you verify that the article has not been closely paraphrased from the offline sources? I'm willing to trust you, but I need you to tell me. If there are sourcing problems, I can help you fix them.
Once that issue is resolved, this will pass GA status. All the best, – Quadell ( talk) 11:54, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
Thrust-vectoring control (TVC) was the solution. It was the key to ultra-maneuverability that enabled the fighter to remain in the zero-speed/high-alpha mode for three or four seconds (i.e., long enough to get a lock-on and fire a missile) or quickly recover from this mode.
The Sukhoi OKB began initial TVC studies as early as 1983. The Western press then described two-dimensional vectoring nozzles as the best option; however, General Designer Mikhail P. Simonov insisted on using axisymmetric vectoring nozzles. (Later events showed that he was right. Sukhoi did research on both types of nozzles, but the experimental 2-D nozzle suffered from severe technological problems.) SibNIA conducted a series of experiments using scale models to test nozzle operation. By 1985 Sukhoi engineers had a clear picture of the forces generated and work began on thrust-vectoring engines. Thus, by the mid 80s the Soviet Union possessed the know-how to create a TVC fighter.
In 1988 and 1990 Sukhoi began a series of tests with the LL-UV (KS) and LL-UV (PS) test-beds. On these aircraft the vectoring nozzle could only move up and down. The results were generally encouragin& and work proceeded on a TVC version of the TlO-M.
Sp33dyphil " Ad astra" 23:34, 20 August 2011 (UTC)