Talk:Chrysler Turbine Car/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Eric Corbett (talk · contribs) 02:27, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.

Detailed comments

Lead

The (rather short) lead doesn't adequately summarise the article. For instance, there's nothing about user feedback, performance, fuel economy, or failure to meet emission controls.

Thanks, Eric. I've taken the time to address this extensively, and have expanded the lede significantly. I am pretty much satisfied with it, but if you have any further recommendations, please feel free to let me know or make them yourself. At this point, I now believe I have addressed all your comments; please let me know if I am mistaken. Michael Barera (talk) 19:12, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's excellent! Eric Corbett 20:20, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Engine

"The car was powered by the A-831 ..." What car are we talking about?

The Chrysler Turbine Car, the subject of the article. I've clarified this now. Michael Barera (talk) 18:26, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"The engine produced 130 hp (97 kW) ... It produced 130 brake horsepower (97 kW) ..." Are we not saying the same thing twice here? Why hp and bhp?

Yes, thanks for catching that. I've merged those two sentences into a single one. Michael Barera (talk) 18:26, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Legacy

"One, owned by Frank Kleptz of Fort Wayne, Indiana ... sold to Kleptz in Hershey, Pennsylvania." I don't think I follow that. Why is relevant where he bought the car anyway?

It is not; I have removed the location of the sale (Hershey), but I do think it is important to note where the cars are located, both currently and in the past. Michael Barera (talk) 18:36, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"The second, owned by comedian and television host Jay Leno, who purchased one of the three Chrysler Turbine Cars originally retained by the company in 2009." That sentence doesn't really work.

I completely agree. I rewrote it to "The second is owned by comedian and television host Jay Leno, who in 2009 purchased one of the three Turbine Cars originally retained by Chrysler." I think this solves the problem. Michael Barera (talk) 18:36, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is a really nice article that's obviously seen a lot of good work, so I'm very happy to be able to close this review with a pass. Eric Corbett 20:20, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.