Talk:T28 super-heavy tank/GA2

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''


 * GA review (see here for criteria)

1 Well written:

(a) the prose is clear and the spelling and grammar are correct: Comments:


 * 'The T28 (also called 105 mm Gun Motor Carriage T95) was a prototype heavily armoured tank destroyer, designed for the US Military' - Bit vague - surely it was for the US Army?


 * 'Although sometimes referred to as a super-heavy tank the T28 was, in reality, a very heavy tank destroyer, and was re-designated as the 105 mm Gun Motor Carriage T95 in 1945. In 1946 it was renamed again, to T28.' - This is basically just repeating the rest of the lead. Please rewrite the lead to at least a decent size without repetition.


 * Very short, staccato sentence throughout the article that need to be tidied up - often they don't seem to make sense next to each other

(b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, jargon, words to avoid, fiction, and list incorporation: Comments:


 * Lead needs to be longer, as stated


 * Layout is extremely confused and sparse, even for a prototype vehicle. The history section is less a history of the T28 than a sentence on the T28 and then talking about other tanks for comparison. There needs to be much more on the tank itself. We know it was to be used for breaching the Siegfried Line. But why? When, exactly - what plans called for its use? Who championed it? Who was against it?


 * 'Comparisons' -> 'Comparison'. This section could also do with some text - moving the random facts about other super-heavy tanks into this section would be a good idea.


 * 1) Factually accurate and verifiable:

(a) it provides references to all sources of information, and at minimum contains a section dedicated to the attribution of those sources in accordance with the guide to layout:


 * Either integrate the wikilinks in 'See Also' or got rid of them

(b) at minimum, it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons:


 * 'After removal they could be fixed together to make a unit that could be towed behind the tank. Due to its extreme weight and low engine power, the T28 had extremely limited obstacle-crossing ability and could not cross any of the portable bridges available at the time, and so was considered impractical in the field and not suitable for production.' - citation needed here

(c) it contains no original research: Pass


 * 1) Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic: Comments:


 * Needs to go into far more detail about the history of the tank

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style): Pass


 * 1) Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias: Pass


 * 1) Stable: it does not change significantly from day-to-day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute: Pass


 * 1) Illustrated, if possible, by images:

(a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content: Pass

(b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: Pass

This could be a GA article, but I think it has a fair way to go, especially in terms of the content in the History section and overall layout of the article. I'll place this on hold for the moment and see what happens. Skinny87 (talk) 14:16, 24 October 2008 (UTC)