Talk:Platt-LePage XR-1

Platt-LePage XR-1 has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
January 4, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on December 11, 2010.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the Platt-LePage Aircraft Company, formed after one of its founders was impressed by a Nazi rotorcraft, beat Sikorsky for the contract to supply the first American military helicopter (pictured)?

Aviation: Rotorcraft

	Aviation portal This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles
	This article is supported by the rotorcraft project.

Military history: Aviation / North America / United States / World War II

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	World War II task force

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Platt-LePage XR-1/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: —Ed!^(talk) 02:49, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria) (see here for this contributor's history of GA reviews)

It is reasonably well written:
Comments
1. "Platt-LePage's submission was judged superior to its competitors" - which of the competitors' models was the XR-1 superior to? And how was it superior? Add a little clarity or links, if possible.
  Done - added a footnote detailing the other submissions; I can't come across exactly how the Army judged the XR-1 superior, just that it did. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 21:11, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
2. "the aircraft was not completed until three months later than the contract schedule" - any idea why this was the case?
  Done - Can't find anything about exactly why there were delays, but I did find that the delays spurred Sikorsky receiving an Army contract, so I've added that. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 21:44, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
3. "With the worst of the bugs believed to be worked out," - calling them 'bugs' seems a little unencyclopedic.
  Done - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 20:37, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
4. "improved helicopters, such as Sikorsky's XR-4, were becoming available" - how was the XR-4 improved over the XR-1?
  Done - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 21:31, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
5. Financial figures would be good too, ie cost of the contract or renegotiations, cost of the models, projected production cost etc.
  Done There's contradictorary information in the sources - the Smithsonian says the intial contract was "nearly $500,000", while Francillon's book gives a number just under $200,000 and notes that contract change orders increased the amount. It seems like the Smithsonian number is the final amount (and is likely more accurate), so I've used that. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 21:35, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is factually accurate and verifiable:
Pass Has plenty of refs.
It is broad in its coverage:
Pass Seems to cover the subject well.
It follows the neutral point of view policy:
Pass
It is stable:
Pass
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate:
Pass Four images.
Overall:
On Hold pending changes. It could stand a copy edit but other than that it meets the GA requirements as I see them. —Ed!^(talk) 03:48, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll get to this soon as I can, my internet access is a bit spotty at the moment. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 06:08, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay, been busy and had connection problems. Will get to this ASAP. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 22:01, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Very good. I am now passing the article. Well done! —Ed!^(talk) 02:43, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]