Talk:Sud-Ouest Espadon/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Zawed (talk · contribs) 08:57, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I will review, comments to follow in due course. Zawed (talk) 08:57, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

Background

link Lucien Servanty
...and submitted the SO.6020 when the French Air Force issued not crazy about the phrasing here. Suggest something like "and submitted a design proposal, designated SO.6020, in response to the French Air Force issuing..."
- Rephrased.
The aircraft had have a speed "had have"? Maybe " had to have.
with planes to order "plans"?
aircraft satisfied the requirements. suggest "aircraft satisfied its requirements.
The aircraft was a metal-skinned mid-wing suggest "As built, the aircraft was a metal-skinned mid-wing..."
was the Heinkel ejection seat part of the original specification?
- Yes.

Development

possibly due to the need to revise the air intakes shouldn't intakes be singular? Or should the first mention of intakes be plural?
- Good catch.
Is there a link for SO.6025?
- No.
I'm confused by the references to the SO.6021 in this section. On the one hand, it is a fighter prototype and on the other it is the proposed production version.
- I think that I've clarified it now

Specifications

Is it necessary to recite the book titles here, can't [16], [17] just go against the "General characteristics" heading?
- The aircraft specs template won't allow that

OK, I didn't realise that was a template. Zawed (talk) 03:19, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Other stuff

Looks good to me, passing as GA as I believe it meets the criteria. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 03:19, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See if my changes are satisfactory. Thanks for being patient with me.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:24, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]