Talk:Leopard 2E/GA1

GA Review
This review is transcluded from Talk:Leopard 2E (tank)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Good article nomination on hold
This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write. This is how the article, as of June 17, 2008, compares against the six good article criteria:


 * 1. Well written?: Minor Fail


 * A few grammatical points in the article need to be cleared up:


 * Spain's Leopard 2E program is part of an armament modernization program named Programa Coraza, or Program Armor. - I think this needs rewording slightly, as it isn't clear until the second sentence that the article is about a tank, even if it is a production programme for the tank.


 * 60% of the tank was manufactured in Spain, while the vehicle was assembled in Sevilla by Santa Bárbara Sistemas. - Could do with rewording, as the first part makes it sound like there was only a single tank being built.


 * Given that the existing tank fleet did not satiate the Spanish Army's needs - Replace satiate with meet.


 * The tank's lethality is maintained - That doesn't sound right, sounds too florid. Perhaps just replace with 'The tank's main armanent is...'


 * About 60% of the Leopard 2E is manufactured in Spain, as opposed to the 30% which was manufactured in Sweden for the Leopard 2S, for example.[39] - Needs rewriting as it again sounds like a single tank is being built.


 * 2. Factually accurate?: Minor Fail


 * A few areas need citations:


 * The acquisition of the Leopard 2 was an endeavour which began as early as 1984, when Krauss-Maffei and Santa Bárbara presented the Lince to the Spanish Ministry of Defense, as their bid to the future Spanish tank. After the cancelation of the Lince and the acquisition of a large number of M60 Patton tanks in 1992, procurement efforts for the Leopard 2A4 began in 1994. These culminated in an agreement to transfer 108 Leopard 2A4s to the Spanish Army in 1998 and to begin production of the Leopard 2E in December 2003. Despite the postponement of production due to the merge between Santa Bárbara Sistemas and General Dynamics in 2003 and continued fabrication issues between 2006 and 2007, 219 Leopard 2Es were delivered to the Spanish Army. - This section could do with several citations, as the rest of the lead has citations.


 * 60% of the tank was manufactured in Spain, while the vehicle was assembled in Sevilla by Santa Bárbara Sistemas. - Needs a citation


 * It has thicker armor on the turret and glacis plate than the German Leopard 2A6, and uses a Spanish-designed tank command and control system, similar to that which is in use in German Leopard 2. - Needs a citation


 * they were considered antiquated. - Who considered them antiquated?


 * However, neither the M60s nor the AMX-30s were a considerable improvement over Spain's fleet of M47 and M48 Patton tanks. - I realize it's cited, but who didn't consider them an improvement/ Government/military officials?


 * Given that the existing tank fleet did not satiate the Spanish Army's needs, Spain opened talks with Germany and Krauss-Maffei over the possibility of future collaboration in regards to Spain's future tank. - Citation could be used here.


 * A memorandum of understanding was signed on 9 June 1995 between the German and Spanish governments, setting the foundations for an acquisition of up to 308 brand-new Leopard 2Es. These were to be assembled in Spain by Santa Bárbara Sistemas, with 60 to 70 percent of the components being manufactured by Spanish companies, and production taking place between 1998 and 2003. - Citations needed here


 * 3. Broad in coverage?: Pass


 * Passes here, no comments needed.


 * 4. Neutral point of view?: Pass


 * Passes, neutral standpoint exists


 * 5. Article stability? Pass


 * Very stable, no editwars, no problem here


 * 6. Images?: Pass


 * Again, no problem. All images have the correct information and are properly captioned

Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved. After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again. If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work so far. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skinny87 (talk • contribs)


 * Thanks Skinny! Grammar-wise, I changed the sentences in question to make them clearer.  A few points on the citations, however - according to the Manual of Style the lead should contain as few citations as possible.  In fact, the only things cited are things that are not mentioned again in the main body (the amount of man hours, the fact that it is one of the most expensive Leopard 2s built, the fact that it is an improvement over the M60A3 and the date it is expected to remain in service to).  I took out three of the four citations and put them in the main body (after fitting in the relevant sentences, as well), with the only citation left being the one which says that the Leopard 2E is an improvement over the M60 (it is inferred by the main body, but not specifically stated - you'd assume it would be an improvement, after all).  The sentence where it says that the M47 and M48 were antiquated has been editted to in 'Spanish Army' (to mention that it was them who considered them antiquated).  As for the AMX-30s and M60s, it's more of a general comment than an opinion.  Otherwise, citations added! JonCatalan (talk) 11:29, 17 June 2008 (UTC)