Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tanks in the Spanish Army


 * The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.  No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Tanks in the Spanish Army

 * Promoted: -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 07:20, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

After six full days of work, I finally have "finished" this article (well, completed all the blanks). There's still much to be done, and I'm hoping that this ACR will help (as they usually do). This includes refining the lead, which I completed hastily (I really didn't know how to begin the introduction), and copyediting the text to the point where it's presentable to FAC. This is the longest article I have ever written (83.7kB) and has some 200 references; this is going to be a pain in the neck! Regardless, thank you for helping! JonCatalán(Talk) 15:38, 6 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment - the lead is by far too long and contains many innapropiate details and uncommon terms. It should be a vrey accesible brief summary of the article. --Eurocopter (talk) 15:56, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
 * WP:LEAD states that if the article is 30kB> then a proper lead has three to four paragraphs. This article hits 83.7kB, and so I think a longer lead is expected.  The actual coverage per paragraph is really low (each paragraph tends to hit two or three different sections of the article).  Which terms should I remove?  I purposely avoided technical terms in the lead.  JonCatalán(Talk) 17:17, 6 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment Support


 * Is there an infobox of any type that can be added to the article? Does one exist for such a wide-ranging article; if it did that might help.
 * 'Tanks in the Spanish Army have over 80 years of history, from 1919 to the present' - This doesn't seem to flow well grammatically. I know you said you've had trouble starting it, but this needs to be rewritten - if I have any ideas I'll try and rewrite it myself.
 * Finding someone to give the. article a good copyedit would also be a good idea.
 * Take the redlinks out of the lead.
 * Not an expert, but run through MILMoS - things like endashes, for example.
 * That 'Main Article - History of the Tank' is out of place, even though I see what you're trying to do.
 * 'Italian B1 Centauro anti-tank cavalry vehicles' - anti-tank cavalry vehicles doesn't seem quite right - the two terms seem opposed.
 * 'Presently, the Spanish Army operates 108 Leopard 2A4s and 219 Leopard 2Es.' - Possesses instead of operates might be a better word.
 * The table of T-26 shipments has an odd left-hand column that's really small but is distracting - could you edit it out, please?
 * Some of the subtitles - like 'Difficult post-war era' seem slightly peacock and leading. Could you make them more nsutral - just 'Post-war era', for example.
 * 'At the end of World War II, the Spanish Army counted on a tank armada' - 'tank force' instead of armada.

That's all for me, I'll give some more comments tomorrow. Skinny87 (talk) 21:08, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Most of it should be fixed, except for the lead (I will have to work on that sentence). I will try to get someone to copyedit the article; my main issues with copyeditors is when they change the structure, so I prefer to do it myself (but, I will look for someone who I've had good experiences with in the past).  MoS issues should be done, except for things that I missed here and there (probably an issue or two with numbers and whatnot; I will have to take a closer look later during a copyedit).  The Centauro is anti-tank cavalry vehicle; it's an anti-tank vehicle, used in the role of cavalry (it's in Spain's cavalry units).  And, I don't believe that there is an infobox for this.  Normally, it just entitles a 300px wide image as the infobox (some times infoboxes are also misused, like in the article Tank; the infobox is so partial in the information it provides, it should just be removed for an article with that scope).  JonCatalán(Talk) 21:58, 8 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Support - one minor issue: tell me that you used endashes with the refs though... (good god, if you didn't, that's going to be a pain to fix for FAC) =/ — Ed   17  (Talk /  Contribs)  16:52, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I always use en dashes with references. I finally got used to just doing it while writing the article, as opposed to going in after and changing them (which is what I used to do so I wouldn't have to copy and paste the en dash, since I don't have it on my keyboard). JonCatalán(Talk) 17:10, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Alright then, the references look picturesque! :) Cheers, — Ed   17  (Talk /  Contribs)  00:35, 12 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment on references - they are perfect. — Ed   17  (Talk /  Contribs)  01:07, 12 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Conditional Support Please get these fixed:
 * Alhucemas links to a disambiguation, please fix this and make sure nothing else does.
 * "The new tank proved satisfactory, and even bettered the French FT-17 in some aspects, and the Spanish Army ordered the construction of four prototypes.[39]" This is awkward, considering spearating the bettering clause with dashes, instaed of using commas.
 * In the Spanish Civil War section, you have a main article link that's a redlink. This should either be removed or corrected.
 * "Although serving little military purpose, due to the shady nature of their design and construction, they were important factors in lifting the Popular Front's military's morale." Don't you mean "shoddy" instead of "shady"? That seems better to me, but it might just be me.
 * Battle of the Ebro is linked twice, make sure that nothing else is either.
 * There are several awkward places in the text, I'd recommend it for a copy-edit. Besides that, however, it looks good. Please get those fixed, and then good luck on an FAC.  Joe  ( Talk ) 21:36, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Got most of that fixed.  Will look forward to getting someone to copyedit the text. JonCatalán(Talk) 15:45, 20 November 2008 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.