Login
Login

Talk:Yakovlev Yak-19/GA1

GA Review

{{Good article tools}}

{{al|{{#titleparts:Yakovlev Yak-19/GA1|-1}}|noname=yes}}
:This review is transcluded from Talk:Yakovlev Yak-19/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · contribs) 01:59, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Will take this one. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 01:59, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

  • Lead and infobox; all good
  • Section 1;
  • Mention "OKB" in full, perhaps in italics as it is a Russian name, and explanation in braces
  • Mention about Lyulka TR-1, turbojet etc.
  • had been used previously; "previously" in the sense? Could mention the aircraft in which the design was used
  • he was provided; rephrase to maintain gender neutrality
  • Soviet fighter pilots of this period were all male.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:53, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Section 2;
  • Link Shpitalny Sh-3 autocannon
  • with the Hero of the Soviet Union, Lieutenant Colonel Mikhail Ivanov, at the controls; like this, it feels that "Hero of the Soviet Union" look like a position, rather than a title. Perhaps "with the Lieutenant Colonel Mikhail Ivanov (Hero of the Soviet Union awardee), at the controls" or something similar would do.
  • Probably best just to drop the medal entirely.
  • Lavochkin La-152#Izdeliye 156; just "Izdeliye 156" would be enough
  • I see that Sergei Anokhin was also given the honour of "Hero of the Soviet Union", so better to mention that too.
  • Rolls-Royce Derwent is over-linked
  • [https://tools.wmflabs.org/copyvios/?lang=en&project=wikipedia&title=Yakovlev+Yak-19&oldid=&action=search&use_engine=1&use_links=1&turnitin=0 0% confidence], violation unlikely

:Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 14:42, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing this.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:53, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

----

:GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

  1. It is reasonably well written.
  2. :a (prose, spelling, and grammar): {{GAList/check|y}} b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): {{GAList/check|y}}
  3. ::
  4. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
  5. :a (reference section): {{GAList/check|y}} b (citations to reliable sources): {{GAList/check|y}} c (OR): {{GAList/check|y}} d (copyvio and plagiarism): {{GAList/check|y}}
  6. ::
  7. It is broad in its coverage.
  8. :a (major aspects): {{GAList/check|y}} b (focused): {{GAList/check|y}}
  9. ::
  10. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
  11. :Fair representation without bias: {{GAList/check|y}}
  12. ::
  13. It is stable.
  14. :No edit wars, etc.: {{GAList/check|y}}
  15. ::
  16. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
  17. :a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): {{GAList/check|y}} b (appropriate use with suitable captions): {{GAList/check|y}}
  18. ::
  19. Overall:
  20. :Pass/Fail: {{GAList/check|y}}
  21. :: Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 13:39, 1 March 2017 (UTC)