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)

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)

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)