Talk:Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carrier/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Folklore1 (talk · contribs) 17:58, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

As I perform the review, I will be updating the following table. Please look for my questions, comments and recommendations below the table. Folklore1 (talk) 18:11, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
	1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	See notes below about corrections applied.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	See notes below about corrections to Lead section.
	2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	See notes about corrections applied to References.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	all quotations and factual info supported with citations at appropriate inline locations
	2c. it contains no original research.
	3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	sufficiently broad coverage of subject
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	comprehensive, without wandering too far on minor details
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	consistently neutral tone
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	no recent edit wars
	6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	3 non-free, 3 US gov't, 2 share-alike, 1 public domain, 1 verified GNU
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	related images with suitable captions placed appropriately within article
	7. Overall assessment.

Lead section

The third paragraph of lead section uses the acronym, "STOVL", without defining the letters. This interferes with readability, because the reader must follow the link to another article to find out what the letters mean. I recommend spelling out an acronym with the first use, as follows: "short take off and vertical landing (STOVL)". Subsequent uses can then be limited to just the acronym. Folklore1 (talk) 19:15, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

 Done

"CATOBAR" should also be spelled out with the first use. Folklore1 (talk) 19:28, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

 Done

"plans changed in 2010, and the carrier version of the F-35C will be purchased and present plans are" in the third paragraph is awkward. The use of "and" twice in the same sentence makes it a bit difficult to read. Folklore1 (talk) 19:24, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

 Done changed wording. Jim Sweeney (talk)

Design studies

The link from the James Rogers reference (Global Power Europe) sent me to an article written in German. Not being able to read German, I do not know whether this is the correct source. Does this link actually connect with the cited article by James Rogers? Folklore1 (talk) 19:53, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

 Done I have changed the ref to an english language site. Jim Sweeney (talk) 20:21, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

The link doesn't seem to be working right. It sent me to a German language site. Folklore1 (talk) 19:08, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Don't know how that happened but ref changed againJim Sweeney (talk) 19:19, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

The second paragraph of this section cites testimony by Sir Alan West, but doesn't mention date of the testimony. The reference footnote identifies the source simply as "Hansard", but I don't know what that means. A little more information about the source, including the date, would be helpful. Folklore1 (talk) 21:00, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

 Done Yes - changed to use the cite hansard template and date added - its the house of commons web site.Jim Sweeney (talk) 22:12, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Systems

See the sentence: While the Artisan has the "ability to track a target the size of a snooker ball over 20 kilometres (12 mi) away". Folklore1 (talk) 16:52, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

There's either something missing from the sentence, or "While" needs to be removed. Folklore1 (talk) 19:47, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Now changed  Done Jim Sweeney (talk) 20:00, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

See: "and the movement of pallets is controlled from a central location, and manpower is" Could the first "and" be replaced by a comma? Folklore1 (talk) 16:52, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Both  Done Jim Sweeney (talk) 17:19, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Crew facilities

See: "Crew facilities will include a cinema, physical fitness areas, four galleys" I think replacing the second comma with "and" would look better. Folklore1 (talk) 17:00, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

"an eight bed medical facility, for the eleven medical staff, which includes" is a little bit awkward and could be misunderstood. Folklore1 (talk) 17:03, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Both  Done Jim Sweeney (talk) 17:17, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Merlin

See: "A utility version, that can carry up to thirty-eight troops or sixteen stretcher patients." Folklore1 (talk) 17:46, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Not sure what you point is here.Jim Sweeney (talk) 18:23, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I attached it to the previous sentence with a colon. Does this look okay to you? Folklore1 (talk) 19:49, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

"but their range and endurance can be extended" does not mention the original range available without the two engine cruise option. Folklore1 (talk) 17:46, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

 Done Jim Sweeney (talk) 18:23, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Wildcat

See: "An improved version of the Westland Lynx military helicopter, the AgustaWestland Lynx Wildcat, scheduled to enter service with the Royal Navy in 2015." Folklore1 (talk) 17:52, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Changed wording. Jim Sweeney (talk) 18:28, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Airborne early warning and control

Should "To Lockheed Martin UK for a Merlin helicopter" be part of the previous sentence? Folklore1 (talk) 18:00, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

reworded does it make more sense. Jim Sweeney (talk) 18:27, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I added a colon. Does that look okay to you? Folklore1 (talk) 18:38, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes ok Jim Sweeney (talk) 18:39, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Queen Elizabeth

See: "Meanwhile, construction of the bow Lower Block 1 was carried out at Appledore, North Devon, and were completed in March 2010." Is there something missing from the sentence? Or does "were" need to be replaced by "was"? Folklore1 (talk) 18:30, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Changed to was. Jim Sweeney (talk) 18:32, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

References

Publication dates, where available, should be given with references. If the publisher ceases to maintain the online file where the reference was originally cited, the publication date can be quite helpful in finding it later in an archive. So, I strongly recommend adding the publication dates (in parentheses) to the following references:

• Navy to get new radar (4 Aug 08)
• First steel cut for new aircraft carrier (26 May 11)
• Britain rethinks jump jet order (Aug. 12, 2009 )
• Cameron: UK to swap JSFs to carrier variant, axe Harrier and Nimrod (19 Oct 2010)
• MPs warn Royal Navy's carriers will be costly, late, and of limited use (28 November 2011)
• Weapons handling system for the new aircraft carrier begins to take shape (15 January 2011)
• ArticleLast Harrier jet launch from HMS Ark Royal (24 Nov 10)
• RAF test pilot on Lightning II (12 Aug 10)
• UK’s first next-generation jet fighter completed (23/11/2011)
• Navy's new Wildcat makes first landing at sea (9 Nov 11)
• BAE SYSTEMS and Northrop Grumman to study UK future airborne early warning concepts (02 Apr 2001)
• E-2D Hawkeye: The Navy’s New AWACS (Aug 16, 2011)
• 80,000 tonnes of steel ordered for new aircraft carriers (4 Mar 08)
• Aircraft lifts ordered for new Navy carriers (4 Apr 08)
• Hi-tech weapons handling system for new aircraft carriers (1 Sep 08)
• Carrier work boosts Scots firms (6 October 2008)
• First steel cut on new carrier (25 Feb 2010)
• Bow Completed for UK's New Aircraft Carrier (7 April 2010)
• Shipyard completes key stage in aircraft carrier project (February 11, 2010)
• Construction begins at new UK carriers' base port (February 25, 2010)
• Huge carrier block arrives in Rosyth (22 August 2011)
• Navy will be 'too small for two carriers' (25 November 2011)
• First steel cut for HMS Prince of Wales (July 2011)

 Done Jim Sweeney (talk) 17:15, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

The link with the reference, "Wärtsilä powers ahead for UK carrier programme", no longer connects to the article by Richard Scott. Folklore1 (talk) 19:31, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

That one seems to have disappeared from Janes - so replaced with another ref and a slight change in text. Jim Sweeney (talk) 19:52, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Believe all done now Jim Sweeney (talk) 20:01, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

 Done Agreed. Folklore1 (talk) 20:16, 5 January 2012 (UTC)