Talk:Petlyakov Pe-3

GA review
I have begun (and ended) a GA review, which can be found here. It was an easy pass, with only a minor comment. Lәo(βǃʘʘɱ) 03:39, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

promised CE of the article, plus some comments
Sturm, I promised I would look this over, and I apologize for the delay. I've made some minor tweaks (swapped subject/object, strengthened verbs, etc.) in the text. There are two parts that need clarification. What is a tactical bomber and why did the German bombing of Moscow convince the Soviets they needed one. I tweaked the lead a bit, to put some important info up front (i.e., this was WWII). We need to understand the bis after the number. What's that about? Auntieruth55 (talk) 23:54, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm just happy that you found the time to get to it; don't worry about the delay. I've changed tactical bomber to high-speed bomber which should be a bit clearer to the ordinary reader and clarified that it was originally designed to be a night fighter. I also added a note about explaining the bis designation. I'm not sure that I like the one sentence lead paragraph, but we'll see how it flies. How does it read now?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:40, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm still not clear on the first sentence in the development. why did they need these aircraft. How does a high speed bomber protect a city being bombed?  Auntieruth55 (talk) 17:00, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Strictly speaking, it doesn't protect anything. But a night fighter derived from a high-speed bomber can at least try to do so.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:38, 20 April 2010 (UTC)