Talk:CAC/PAC JF-17 Thunder/GA3

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Tomandjerry211 (talk · contribs) 11:57, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

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

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   The Article is quite long (>75 KB), so please try to split it into reasonable subpages.  Not done

   Repeating the same cite over and over again is unecessary  Done Faizan (talk) 12:15, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

   Inconsistency: Block 2 and Block II  Done

   Please use American or British English, not both.  Done

   Has a bunch of jargon that most readers don't understand (for example "fairing").  Doing...

   Lead and Infobox

   Citations are Unecessary in the lead and infobox  Done Faizan (talk) 10:46, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

   Development section

   Dup link to Thomson-CSF  Done

   Link to fighter, bomber, Pakistan, and interceptor  Done

   Operational History section

   Should change title to Service History  Done

   Dup links to Rao Qamar Suleman and Nigeria  Done

   Design section

   Dup links to Head up display and multi-function displays  Done

   The JF-17 can be armed with up ...  Done

   Variants

   "Mach 2.0+" would do better as "over two times the speed of sound"  Done Faizan (talk) 10:02, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   Has a "dubious-discuss" and a "citation needed" tag in the "Specifications (Block 1)" section.  Done Faizan (talk) 08:20, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

   Has 8 dead links in the article.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Thanks for starting the review, there was a huge backlog. I am taking exams but will try to get this completed as soon as possible. Regarding the 8 dead links, these articles of Janes and Aviation Week were either deleted from their websites or were moved to the paid archives. I could not find them in the available archives too, I cannot find the substitute sources. Faizan (talk) 10:18, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Universal British English is being used in the article. Faizan (talk) 10:21, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Well, regarding the jargon, I propose that the text be abridged. Aircraft fairing is a component of the airframe, but I am also sure that most readers have not heard about it before. Faizan (talk) 11:03, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

No reasonable split can be made. Generally article is split when it crosses 100 KB. General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon is >114 KB. So split is unnecessary. Faizan (talk) 12:27, 12 April 2015 (UTC)