Talk:Speed flying and speed riding/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Khazar2 (talk · contribs) 11:58, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be glad to take this review if you're still active; sorry you've had to wait so long for a reviewer. Initial comments to follow in the next hour or so. -- Khazar2 (talk) 11:58, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Initial comments

This article is brief, but potentially covers the major aspects of its subject. Thanks again for your work on it. I do see some areas here in which the article will need work.

The lead needs to summarize major aspects of the article (history, the wing, safety) per WP:LEAD.
The numerous images crowd the text, which is an issue per WP:LAYOUT. A good rule of thumb is that you don't want to have an image across from another image on the same line.
The section "Comparison to paragliding and parachuting" has no sources, raising original research concerns.
"Speed flying" is inconsistently capitalized through the article--sometimes the "s" is capitalized, even mid-sentence, and sometimes it's not. "Speed Wing" is also inconsistently capitalized.
Images need captions per criterion 6b.
Names of print publications need to be in italics in the References (National Geo., Telegraph, etc.)
The source does not appear to support the statement " and over 100 instructors in around 20 different countries" -- unless I'm misreading, only 12 countries are listed here. I'm also not sure at first glance that Gin Gliders is a reliable secondary source--they seem to be a site for glider sales, but I may be misunderstanding this.
I'm also skeptical that www.groundlaunching.com, http://spi.speedflying-interlaken.ch/, http://ulrichprinz.de/air/speed/index.html, or www.speed-flying.com qualify as reliable sources, which requires an established reputation for editorial fact-checking and accuracy. Are they well-established publications widely cited by other organizations? Generally it's best to stick with news organizations and academic scholarship; the Telegraph article, for example, is an ideal source.
All the statistics in the table "Comparing Speed Wings, Paragliders, and Parachutes" are unsourced.
The article needs some copyediting ("verses" instead of "versus", unclear pronouns, etc.). Some sentences are a bit confusing, such as the many clauses in " One of these, Francois Bon, a paraglider test pilot, unsatisfied with foot-launched parachute performance helped perfect the first speed wing design,[6] the Gin Nano".
"Over 25 pilots have already suffered fatal injuries worldwide since 2006" -- needs to say something like "as of" per WP:REALTIME; this statistic may already be out of date.
"Today speed gliders are produced by over 30 manufacturers worldwide." -- statistic needs citation

Since these issues seem fairly extensive, I'm going to close this review so that they can be addressed without time pressure. I hope you'll continue work on this, however, and consider renominating this one in the future. And just let me know if you have any questions or if there's any way I can help! Thanks and all best, -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:28, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]