# Talk:Soyuz flight VS22

This review is transcluded from Talk:Soyuz flight VS22/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Kingsif (talk · contribs) 03:13, 22 September 2019 (UTC)


### Style
Lead good length for article
Good use of wikilinks and, where needed (not often), explanatory briefs
Rocket section well-written.
Might suggest rephrasing the "Manufactured..." sentence to make certainly clear that it was modified for climate at the Samara centre, but not necessary.
Similarly for a brief explanation that the payload is satellite comm. tech, in case that isn't clear/for clarity on why it's integrated via a mobile tower for readers who aren't good with tech.
Payload section good.
May benefit from a brief explanation of throughput (again, for readers with less tech knowledge), but not completely vital because the idea is clear without it
Could have '(lag)' next to the mention of latency, but it's in the cite quote and near the top of the latency article, so equally not vital for understanding and info available on the page
Flight seems good, made minor technical edit (adding "the" before Fregat, so readers don't think the upper stage's given name is Fregat)
Very nice.
Pass


### Coverage
Lead covers main points of article
Rocket section comprehensive on the rocket used, its specifications, comparisons, and extra details relevant to this event
Payload section good on the load and on the background (and future) of it
Nothing appears to be lacking in terms of detail, all expected and a bit more background included
Pass


### Illustration
Included suitable image in infobox
Pass


### Neutrality
Good
Pass


### Verifiability
Good selection of sources
Everything cited inline
Pass


### Stability
Minor edit... scuffle... on 6 September. Seems solid now. Main editor clean up good
Pass on the basis the main editor keeps watch as exemplified on 6 Sep.


### Copyright
Fair use image
Clean check
Pass


### Overall
 A few ideas for improvement, but nothing stopping this from being GA. Very nice. Kingsif (talk) 03:13, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
@Kingsif: Very unusual to see an article be instantaneously passed, but thanks for your review! – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 10:34, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
@PhilipTerryGraham: Yeah, some just are GA standard, very nice work I guess Kingsif (talk) 15:48, 22 September 2019 (UTC)