Prandtl-D edit
| Toolbox |
|---|
 | This peer review discussion has been closed. |
I've listed this article for peer review because I think it has the capacity to become a great article and would like other user's feedback on it. I hope to improve the list of vehicle section and overall syntax of the article.
Thanks, - AH (talk) 18:47, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
Comments by paul2520 edit
Hi, AttackHelicopter51. I have a few comments:
- a couple of the references are duplicated. See Wikipedia:Named reference / I do see some cases where you use named references already.
- see WP:LAYOUT for section order & remove stray URL from "External links" --> you might convert the content of this section to using a
{{cite}}template - there are a couple places that could use inline cites: the sentence ending in "...by 11%." (only the first half is sourced?) and the one beginning with "The first two vehicles of the program..." in the Development section.
- Is there any prose or distinction that could be given in the "List of Vehicles in the Program" section? Also, any sources?
- I don't think anything should be bold in the Future platforms section.
- I'm debating about the lead. It's good I think, but a bit long. Might there be a "description" or "history" section? Of course, "Development" covers some of that.
I think the cites are good otherwise. All from NASA, but that's OK.