This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
GA review (see here for criteria) (see here for this contributor's history of GA reviews)
It is reasonably well written:
Comments
"Platt-LePage's submission was judged superior to its competitors" - which of the competitors' models was the XR-1 superior to? And how was it superior? Add a little clarity or links, if possible.
Done - added a footnote detailing the other submissions; I can't come across exactly how the Army judged the XR-1 superior, just that it did. - The BushrangerOne ping only 21:11, 28 December 2010 (UTC)Reply
"the aircraft was not completed until three months later than the contract schedule" - any idea why this was the case?
Done - Can't find anything about exactly why there were delays, but I did find that the delays spurred Sikorsky receiving an Army contract, so I've added that. - The BushrangerOne ping only 21:44, 28 December 2010 (UTC)Reply
"With the worst of the bugs believed to be worked out," - calling them 'bugs' seems a little unencyclopedic.
Financial figures would be good too, ie cost of the contract or renegotiations, cost of the models, projected production cost etc.
Done There's contradictorary information in the sources - the Smithsonian says the intial contract was "nearly $500,000", while Francillon's book gives a number just under $200,000 and notes that contract change orders increased the amount. It seems like the Smithsonian number is the final amount (and is likely more accurate), so I've used that. - The BushrangerOne ping only 21:35, 28 December 2010 (UTC)Reply
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate:
Pass Four images.
Overall:
On Hold pending changes. It could stand a copy edit but other than that it meets the GA requirements as I see them. —Ed!(talk) 03:48, 17 December 2010 (UTC)Reply
Thanks. I'll get to this soon as I can, my internet access is a bit spotty at the moment. - The BushrangerOne ping only 06:08, 17 December 2010 (UTC)Reply
Sorry for the delay, been busy and had connection problems. Will get to this ASAP. - The BushrangerOne ping only 22:01, 24 December 2010 (UTC)Reply
Very good. I am now passing the article. Well done! —Ed!(talk) 02:43, 4 January 2011 (UTC)Reply