Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Lince (tank)

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This article was promoted Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:35, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lince (tank)[edit]

This has gone through an extensive peer review, although it did produce some 'shake-ups' (rewritten statements turned some correct facts into incorrect facts), these have been dealt with as a I re-read the article to make sure everything is correct (please, if you copy edit and change things around make sure that the sentence implies the same thing). It passed a Good Article review today, and I'm looking to make this A-class. Thank you. JonCatalan (talk) 18:37, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Nicely written and informative article. If there is any remaining legacy from the Lince program, such as plans for using any of its research for other, future designs, that probably should be mentioned in the article. If little of value was gained from the Lince program, then it appears that the Spanish government spent 1.8 billion dollars for nothing. Was there any public outcry in Spain over this expenditure for a canceled program? Were any hearings held in the Spanish government? Were any military or political leaders fired or removed because of the cancellation of the program in spite of how much money was spent on it? In any case, the article meets the A-class standards. Good work. Cla68 (talk) 21:16, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! The Lince does seem to be 'wasted money'. None of the news article I have read have mentioned anybody publically critisizing the cancelation of the project. I do know that at the time the Spanish military preferred the Lince to the M60, but to those I have spoken to they also mention that the Leopard 2A4 and then the Leopard 2E were much better choices in the long-run. Unfortunately, I have no 'hard' references to add that in, as it's all 'own research'. JonCatalan (talk) 23:13, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support - I reviewed and copyedited this for GA, so I don't know if my support is acceptable, but I would like to say that I found this very interesting, informative and well-written and think it should certainly make A-Class.--Jackyd101 (talk) 23:16, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.