Talk:Mechanical engineering/GA1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] GA Review

I'm happy to do thorough reviews, because we need more participation from science and tech editors, and because the WP:GAU review indicated that almost everyone bringing articles to WP:GAN wants more input on their writing. I'm happy to do less if you want less.

[edit] Quick-fail criteria

  1. Plenty of reliable sources.
  2. Neutrality issues are completely absent; quite a relief after Cold fusion!
  3. No cleanup tags.
  4. The article has been very stable recently.
  5. The article doesn't concern a current event.

I don't see any issues; editors are welcome to correct me. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 16:33, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Well written

  • Please read WP:LEAD. The lead section for this article should be two to four paragraphs, summarizing the main points.
  • There's an issue with the "sea of blue" in the lead section, although this is sometimes a point of disagreement between WP:FAC reviewers and more scientifically-inclined editors. Scientists prefer denser articles with more links than the average Wikipedia reader, so it's a judgment call. I have followed all the links from the lead, and I thought they all added very useful information, except for motor vehicles.
  • I replaced the ampersands with "and", per WP:MOS.
  • Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I replaced "Mechanical engineering could be found in many ancient and medieval societies throughout the globe" with "Applications of mechanical engineering...". You're defining mechanical engineering as an academic discipline, but your examples don't point to academicians, they're pointing to devices that were designed using principles that nowadays would come from mechanical engineering.
  • I added a bit of information on engineering societies in the 19th century.
  • When discussing history in general, use "can be found" rather than "could be found", if the implication is that modern people are the ones doing the finding.
  • I wouldn't mind inclusion of a study breaking down which courses are taken on average by mechanical engineering students in various countries, but just saying that they tend to study humanities doesn't really help, IMO.
  • I'm doing a lot of the copyediting myself. There are a lot of pages devoted to capitalization rules in style guides such as NYTM and AP Stylebook, but a rule of thumb is: if the sentence can possibly be read with a word or phrase being used in the sense of a common noun, then don't capitalize.
  • "to continue even after the analyst goes home for the day": I don't know what this means.
  • The list in Mechanical engineering#Mechatronics and robotics would be better as prose with a little more description; see the first paragraph of WP:EMBED#Lists_within_articles.

[edit] Factually accurate and verifiable

  • There's no reference, inline or otherwise, for the statement about the importance of Heron of Alexandria. You can't use a WP article as a reference, and that WP article unfortunately doesn't use web references. I suggest using this one: http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9040189/Heron-of-Alexandria. If you don't subscribe to EB, it begins: "Greek geometer and inventor whose writings preserved for posterity a knowledge of the mathematics and engineering of Babylonia, ancient Egypt, and the Greco-Roman world." You don't need a reference for every statement in an article, just a reference for every statement "challenged or likely to be challenged" (WP:V). A lot of people haven't heard of Heron (aka Hero) of Alexandria, so that needs a source.
  • "deeply influenced" is not good. Per WP:WEASEL, give a short sentence, at least, saying what we got from Heron and Archimedes that makes them important. I added a short list of accomplishments for Zhang Heng and Ma Jun (which would be improved by citations from those articles).
  • In Mechanical engineering#Salaries and workforce statistics, the present tense is used with 2004. Either the figures need to be updated, or the tone needs to be something different from "current events".
  • "I'm skeptical about master's degrees not requiring any coursework; let's just say that it may or may not include research" in the edit summary was me, not logged in.
  • "Most mechanical engineering programs also require varying amounts of research or community projects to gain practical problem-solving experience. Mechanical engineering students usually hold one or more internships while studying, though this is not typically mandated by the university." At that level of detail, I think you need a source, and not just a source that says what happens at one university. If you just said "Some mechanical engineering programs include community projects and internships", that probably wouldn't need a cite. (Research was mentioned earlier.)
  • "Canadian engineers make an average of $29.83 per hour...". Again, that's from 2004, but the "accessed" date implies it's for 2007. Please go through the whole article making sure that old data is represented that way, or even better, update the data.
  • "second only to civil engineers in size". Hm, I think you meant something else.
  • "Canadian engineers make an average of $29.83" Canadian dollars?

[edit] Broad in its coverage

[edit] Neutral

[edit] Stable

[edit] Images

The images are helpful, and the captions are good. In fact, I'm using the captions as an example of good caption-writing at WP:CAPTIONS.

[edit] References comment

Doesn't seem to have enough inline references to me. But then I don't see any fact tags either and I'm more used to Feature Article reviews. -Fnlayson (talk) 16:44, 29 May 2008 (UTC)