Talk:Dornier Do Y

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dornier Do Y article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Dornier Do Y 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.
Review: September 29, 2023. (Reviewed version).

Aviation: Aircraft

	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
	This article is supported by the aircraft project.

Military history: Aviation / European / German / 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

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	European military history task force
	German military history task force
	World War II task force

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Dornier Do Y/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Djmaschek (talk · contribs) 02:04, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Initial review

I plan to review this for GA class. This has been scanned and looks pretty good. Djmaschek (talk) 02:04, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Review 1

@Sturmvogel 66: Please fix the following or argue your case to leave it as is. Aside from these comments, everything looks good for GA class. Djmaschek (talk) 04:23, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Description, paragraph 2: "two-bladed wooden propellers..." (The Specifications section states 3-bladed.)
- The first two have 2 bladed props, but the next pair have three-bladed ones. Clarified.
Description, paragraph 2: "Ostric believes..." (Please use full name. Not everyone will open note 1 and read "Aviation historian Sime Ostric". For the main article, "Aviation historian Sime Ostric" would be nice.)
Description, paragraph 3: While visualizing the armament layout, I got confused about "dorsal" (back, upper) and "ventral" (front, lower). It says twin-mounts in (1) upper nose and (2) between wing and tail, which are well-described, and a single ventral mount. Later, the observer is mentioned manning the "belly gun". Why not call it belly gun instead of ventral?
Description, paragraph 4: "added to fuselage" (added to the fuselage)
Operational history, paragraph 2: Earlier in the article, it refers to the "Do Ys". Then the form "Do Y's" is used. I understand that using "Do Yms" would be extremely awkward, and best avoided. I think there may be an exception for using apostrophe s after acronyms and jargon for plurals. If you can find the rule somewhere, let me know. Whatever form is used, it must be consistent. (Suggestion: Continue using "Do Ys" and when referring to Do Ym, use "The two Do Ym aircraft" or "Do Ym variants".)

Thanks for your review. I think that I've addressed all of your points.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:59, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sturmvogel 66: GA class. To make the form consistent, I edited Do Ys to Do Y's two times. Djmaschek (talk) 01:10, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]