Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Peer review/Verdeja (tank)
Greetings, I was looking forward to expanding this article for a while - since the T-26 article really. I have finally found the time and I have finished the 'rough draft'. I still have to look over my writing and make the prose better, but I would appreciate it if anybody could peer review it and offer specific aid. Thank you. JonCatalan (talk) 20:36, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Skinny87
editHey Mac! I'll give it a look over now and see if I can give you a hand. I'm fairly new, but hopefuly I'll find something by tonight. Skinny87 (talk) 10:17, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
- One thing comes to mind - the red-linked Captain in the Lead. Will he be notable enough to be given an article, or could it be replaced just by text? Skinny87 (talk) 10:39, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
- Hey Skinny, thank's for taking the time to look at the page! I stubbed that article to get rid of the red link; I may expand the article at a later date, when I can gather enough sources to make a decent article. Thanks! JonCatalan (talk) 11:09, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
- No probs. Looking over the lead, this : "The program was headed by Captain Félix Verdeja Bardales and led to the development of four prototype vehicles, including a self-propelled howitzer sporting a 75 mm cannon." might be a good candidate for a citation. I know there's one on the next sentence, but I think it warrants one. Skinny87 (talk) 17:33, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
- Hm, I normally wouldn't hesitate to put a citation where someone asked me to put one, but do you think it's necessary? I was reading a number of comments on other article's talk pages to pass the good article review and there was one which said that a good lead had as many few citations as possible, as the citations were in the rest of the text. The text does cover all four prototypes in depth, so I don't want to add an unnecessary citation and be asked to remove it down the road.JonCatalan (talk) 11:19, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
- Well, it's only my first review and you make a good point, so don't add it in! Skinny87 (talk) 17:07, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
- Hm, I normally wouldn't hesitate to put a citation where someone asked me to put one, but do you think it's necessary? I was reading a number of comments on other article's talk pages to pass the good article review and there was one which said that a good lead had as many few citations as possible, as the citations were in the rest of the text. The text does cover all four prototypes in depth, so I don't want to add an unnecessary citation and be asked to remove it down the road.JonCatalan (talk) 11:19, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Dhatfield
editThis is well written and excellently cited. I'd say the best way to improve it is to summarise the text, particularly the lead paragraph. "The tank's proved superiority over the T-26 during testing conducted in Spain was not able to influence a large enough effort to put the tank into mass production", is particularly jarring. Although I hesitate to suggest it, consider trimming down the number of facts you present to get better flow, conciseness and notability - this is a barrage of information. Thanks for your citiation work on Tank. Dhatfield (talk) 11:23, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you for taking the time to read the article and offering kind words! As per your suggestion, I reworded that specific sentence in the introduction - Although the Verdeja was considered a superior tank to the T-26, after a lengthy testing period, the vehicle was never put into mass production. Furthermore, I took some things out, but I wasn't sure on exactly what could be considered extraneous information (at least, relative to the rest of the information) - for example, I took out references to the angle of the sloping of the plates. In the meanwhile, I will try to improve the introduction by providing a better summary. JonCatalan (talk) 12:15, 29 May 2008 (UTC)