Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/AMX-30


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by User:SandyGeorgia 03:16, 21 December 2008.

AMX-30

 * Nominator(s): JonCatalán(Talk)

The AMX-30 was France's first truly mass produced post-war tank, and most successful (including the AMX 50 and the Leclerc. My interest stems from its direct relationship with the Spanish AMX-30E, which I took through FAC a while ago.  I believe this one meets the requirements, and as usual I will do everything as quickly as possible if anything does come up.  Thank you!  JonCatalán(Talk) 04:42, 15 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Comments:Well-written, and well sourced, through and through. A few remarks, though:
 * There is no mention of the AMX-30B2 "Brennus", the latest version fitted with "Brennus" reactive armour(hence the name).
 * The Combat History section is very short, especially on the French participation in the Gulf War. 44 AMX-30s were deployed to the Gulf, and they were an important part of the "Daguet" Division, the French ground force (not just an armoured brigade, as is incorrectly stated in the article). The AMX-30s took part in the capture of As-Salman airbase, and though Iraqi resistance was only sporadic, I have seen some photos(in French publications) of Iraqi tanks knocked out by sabot rounds from AMX-30s. Some mention of this would be good. --Raoulduke47 (talk) 18:00, 15 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Responses; the problem with both is that there are no reliable sources on either one.  I do mention that there was reactive armor added to two battalions of AMX-30s, which refers to the Brennus upgrades, but the source doesn't mention the name.  As a result, I'm not going to add the name.  The same in regards to the combat section; there are no reliable sources.  Those websites are not regarded as reliable sources, and would not pass this FAC.  JonCatalán(Talk) 20:20, 15 December 2008 (UTC)


 * - The Brennus upgrade was introduced in 1995, so I doubt it is the same thing as the 1979 ERA package.
 * - The B2 variant is described briefly in the lead section, but not in the "variants" section. Is there a reason for this?
 * - Footnote number 39 reads "Bishop, page 31", but I can't see any source written by anyone called Bishop. What's with that? --Raoulduke47 (talk) 18:53, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The B2 variant is described under the sub section "modernization", under "development history". Again, if you can give me a reliable source on the Bernnus, I can add it in.  In regards to Bishop, I must have forgot to add the source into the bibliography. JonCatalán(Talk) 19:09, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I think that ERA package refers to the Brennus, but doesn't distinguish by clarifying. I will attempt to clarify the Wiki article. JonCatalán(Talk) 19:20, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, I don't have any good sources about the Brennus armour :-(  Apart from that, it seems that GIAT built an experimental stealth tank, based on the AMX-30 . Details are sketchy, but it could be mentioned. --Raoulduke47 (talk) 22:50, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I was actually looking for that article; I have it on paper somewhere. JonCatalán(Talk) 08:32, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Comments -
 * Current refs 78 & 79 (the El Pais site refs) should state the language they are in.
 * Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:10, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Done! JonCatalán(Talk) 17:13, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Image review:
 * Hi, Jon. Can you clean up the summary information or transform it into an template for File:Amx30 proto 09.jpg and File:Pluton 034.jpg, and provide English descriptions for File:AMX-30.JPG and File:EBG-cote-droit.JPG? Thanks. Or, uh...tanks. That was awful... --Moni3 (talk) 18:23, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey, thanks for pointing those out! Problems should be resolved. JonCatalán(Talk) 21:00, 16 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Support - another excellent tank article (you need to find a new subject to write about one of these days;) Cam (Chat) 00:10, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * World War II battles don't count? JonCatalán(Talk) 15:35, 18 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Support, w/ comment - in-line citations look alright, and (totally nit-picking here) there is a mini-image sandwich with the second and third images in the 'Variants' section. (Just one line; if you can't/don't want to move one of the images, there is no way I will oppose for one line :) Also, I agree with Cam - maybe start on some battleship articles? ;D  Allanon   ♠The Dark Druid♠ 07:29, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Sandwich has been removed.  And, I actually did have a battleship article in mind; I just don't have enough sources on it (the España class Battleship). :p JonCatalán(Talk) 15:35, 18 December 2008 (UTC)


 * support but hmm if there was coverage on the question of if the lightweight MBT theory was actualy valid I missed it.Genisock2 (talk) 16:36, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I could make comparisons between the AMX-30 and heavier tanks, but I would rather have the reader do it him/herself; otherwise, it would be original research (I have no sources which make the comparison for me; or that validate the idea of mobility taking priority over protection). JonCatalán(Talk) 16:39, 18 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Lean support I don't see any major problems at this time. However, I will keep an eye on what others say. Ottava Rima (talk) 17:13, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Good work as usual, but a copyedit is needed. My biggest concern is the use of redundant words, but that should be easy to resolve. –Juliancolton Happy Holidays 17:52, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Support Comments
 * Is it possible to cut down on the lead a tad? It seems slightly too long.
 * Although the 48 metric tons (53 short tons) vehicle was comparable to contemporary battle tanks in firepower and engine power, it suffered from distinct disadvantages, including an antiquated track design. - Should that be "48 metric tons"?
 * Although the 48 metric tons (53 short tons) vehicle was comparable to contemporary battle tanks in firepower and engine power, it suffered from distinct disadvantages, including an antiquated track design.[1] Although 600 were planned for production, only 60 were ultimately manufactured by 1950. - Avoid starting consecutive sentences with the same word.
 * Given that the ARL 44 was considered a stop-gap vehicle since the beginning of its inception, work on a new tank had begun as early as March 1945. - What's a "stop-gap vehicle"?
 * The new vehicle was designated the AMX 50, and its hull and suspension were very similar to that of the German Panther tank, which had been used by the French Army in the immediate post-war. - No need for "very".
 * Although the design borrowed a lot from German tanks, including the Maybach 1,000 horsepower (750 kW) engine, based on an earlier model, and the torsion bar sprung road wheels, the AMX 50 also included a number of unique features. - Is there a better term for "a lot"?
 * Although it was intended to put the AMX 50 into production, financial reasons and the arrival of military aid from the United States, in the form of 856 M47 Patton tanks,[9] caused the program to be abandoned in the mid-1950s. - This sentence reads oddly. I suggest removing the commas after "states" and "tanks".
 * Furthermore, the new tank would have a multifuel, air-refrigerated engine, a torsion bar suspension with hydraulic shocks, and a road range of at least 350 kilometers (220 mi). - Remove "furthermore".
 * The images in the Development history section should alternate from left to right. Also, could the section be broken up with a sub-header? As of now, it's a slightly overwhelming block of text.
 * In contrast to the AMX 50, the AMX-30 was issued a conventional turret, since it was found that it was much more difficult to seal oscillating turrets from radioactive dust and against water when the tank was submerged. - "Since" &rarr; "because", and remove "much".
 * Originally, the first two prototypes were powered by a 720 horsepower (540 kW) spark ignition engine, named the SOFAM 12 GSds, however, later a multi-fuel diesel engine was adopted, developed by Hispano-Suiza. - This sentence needs a bit of rewording.
 * Similar to the Development history section, the Variants section could use a couple sub-headers.
 * The vehicle also has a 80-meter (87 yd) heavy towing cable, while an auxiliary wrench has another 120-meter (130 yd) towing cable, capable of towing up to 20 metric tons (22 short tons) when working over the front of the AMX-30D, although in this case the vehicle must be supported by removable props, which are carried on the vehicle, and the bulldozer blade must be lowered on the ground. - Needs to be broken up into two sentences.
 * Although a prototype, designated AMX-30H, was completed in 1968, it was not until 1971 that the vehicle was evaluated. - Remove the first two commas to improve sentence flow.
 * The self-propelled anti-aircraft gun began development in 1969 to provide this type of vehicle to the French Army and provide it for export. - Avoid the use of repetitive words in a sentence ("provide").
 * Production of the AMX-30 took place at the Atelier de Construction de Roanne, in the town of Roanne. - No need for the comma.
 * Originally, 300 AMX-30s were ordered by the French Army, but by 1971 the order had been increased to 1,000, divided between eight batches. - "But" isn't really an encyclopedic word.
 * Starting in 1987, the Spanish Army began a six year modernization program which brought 150 tanks up to AMX-30EM2 standards and modified another 149 tanks to AMX-30EM1 standards. - Remove "starting".
 * In the mid-1980s, Venezuela also adopted a modernization plan for its deprecated AMX-30s, opting to replace the original engine with a new Continental AVDS-1790-5A diesel engine, producing 908 horsepower (677 kW) and exchanging the existing transmission with an Allison CD-850-6A. - Remove "also".
 * Furthermore, Venezuelan AMX-30s received new fuel tanks, increasing the tank's road range to 720 kilometers (450 mi), while firepower was improved through the adoption of a modern fire control system. - "Furthermore" is a slightly odd word. In my opinion, the sentence would be better off without the word, or with "additionally" as a replacement.
 * Due to political problems between Chile and Argentina, the former placed an order for 46 tanks, although this was later cut short to 21 when the contract was canceled by the French government in 1981. - "Problems" &rarr; "issues".
 * Total production of the AMX-30 and variants totaled at 3,571 units. - No need for "at".
 * Alright, thanks for the review! Everything should be resolved, except for a few.  Namely, I didn't want to divide variants into any sub sections, because it would have made it more difficult to read (it would have chopped the section into several sub-sections, a paragraph each.  I divided the development history section, but as you can see, the effect is almost the same.  And, I clarified the sentence with "stop-gap" in it, but that word is not meant to be jargon; it's another word for "temporary" (while implying that it will be replaced). I didn't know how to define the word in that sentence.  Apart from that, I will work on the lead. JonCatalán(Talk) 18:14, 18 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Support — Excellent article all around. Well-cited, easy to read and understand, and nicely illustrated. I do have a question on the combat deployments, however. Wasn't the AMX-30 deployed on peacekeeping missions as well? If so, it'd be nice to at least mention those actions, as the article on the Leclerc does. JKBrooks85 (talk) 19:45, 20 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Notes, please fix the dab identified in the toolbox, and why are warheads in WP:ITALICS? Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 02:50, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I had originally put them in italics, since they were French designations. I took off the italics, except for the round which actually is spelled in French (as a series of words).  JonCatalán(Talk) 05:11, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.