Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Peer review/Empire Air Mail Scheme

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Empire Air Mail Scheme

I've listed this article for peer review because it contains new knowledge about an important inter-war aviation scheme

Thanks,

Peterewer (talk) 09:41, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Born2flie

Peer review (this checklist is based off of the {{GAList}} example and incorporates some of the Featured article criteria as well)

A brief look through the article. I may add more specific comments afterwards.

Prose
a. well written: b. comprehensive: c. factually accurate: d. summary style:
Some language may need to be reviewed. For instance, "hugely expensive" and the use of the term 'Dominions' seems a bit colloquial and not in an international summary style. The article feels like it can be expanded to cover more about other territories/colonies, what the article refers to as the 'Dominions', as it seems to focus mostly on Australia.
References
a. use of inline citations: b. reliable sources: c. No original research:
I need to perform more review here.
Style
a. lead section: b. appropriate structure: c. conforms to WP:MOS:
There is no lead, or introduction to the article. This will help to allow more of a structure in the article. Perhaps using the airline infobox as well?
Controversy
a. neutral point of view: b. stable, with no edit wars:
Graphics
a. quality: b. image licenses:
Could use some pictures of the aircraft that were in use, or pictures of first class mail being loaded.
Quality:
Article classification:
Stub-class. Altogether a well written article so far, but it needs a bit more to progress further along. Illustrating images, an infobox of some sort, and more coverage. The redlinks at the bottom of the article should show Fairey FC1 and Short S.32. Sorry to review and run, but I have a plane to catch! --Born2flie (talk) 14:22, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.