Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Peer review/Rolls-Royce Merlin

The following discussion 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.

Rolls-Royce Merlin

As suggested I am submitting this article for peer review before hopefully nominating it in the near future for a Featured Article review. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 15:05, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Trevor MacInnis

Suggestions generated by an automatic JavaScript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 000 ft , use 000 ft , which when you are editing the page, should look like: 000 ft .^[?]
Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), please spell out source units of measurements in text; for example, the Moon is 380,000 kilometres (240,000 mi) from Earth.^[?] Specifically, an example is 000 ft. Units in the specifications section can still be abbreviations, though.
Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. - Just a first run, a more detailed review to follow. - Trevor MacInnis ^contribs 03:23, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Trevor, I didn't realise that a script could go through articles, clever idea, beyond me though!

Non-breaking spaces: There were some missing, mainly in the 'specs' section. I've added them where required and hopefully have them all now.
Units: I had another read of the guidelines and I think I understand them. I have now wikilinked and written out in full any units at their first instance in the article, providing the common abbreviation in parentheses immediately after. In some cases I had to remove the 'convert' template to achieve this. Units are abbreviated elsewhere afterwards in the article which I think is acceptable/normal practise (hopefully!).
Copy editing: The article has had a couple of run throughs by User:Red Sunset who I regard as a highly adept copy editor, I've had another run through myself just now and added clarifying wikilinks, corrected some uppercase letters, added retrieval dates to webcites (also checking that the links are 'live') and adjusted a couple of slightly awkward sentences. Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 14:22, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see the exact requirement now (primary units in full throughout apart from 'specs', converted units abbreviated), will fix it. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 16:57, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have reviewed the article and made some small changes, but I can't find anything further that would improve it! - Ahunt (talk) 20:45, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could I ask in the absense of any objectors that this review is closed. I would really like to get on with the task of FA promotion, I note that the Lebaudy Patrie has been an open case since January 2009. Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 00:24, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Closing and archiving as the article is being nominated for Featured Article. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 07:59, 10 September 2009 (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.