Totally agree with you on this! StrategyPage does have some good stories now and then, but even THEN it is mostly a military-esque analogue of Phonics. As in, very basic, very simplistic, and without too much attention to accuracy or fact-checking. It is nice for a quick McDonald's Meal type bite, but it lags even below WikiPedia in terms of veracity. It is basically physics for Third Graders - gives a rough and simple overview, but with some fundamental mistakes here and there.
For instance - the WS-10a is a joke. There are several reasons why it is, and some day (maybe in the next 5 years) the Chinese will make a perfect replacement for the Russian AL-Fs they are forced to use, but currently (and for the past number of years) that engine has been a nightmare. While there are some FReepers who claim that Chinese military technology is (and I quote) 'light years better' than Russian military technology, the sad fact is that in areas like engines and RADAR the Chinese are not even where the Russians were in the mid-1980s (e.g. the Zaslon S-800 'Flash Dance' PESA RADAR). Currently the Russians are working on supercruising engines, while the Chinese have not even mastered 90s engine technology.
As compared to the US ...not even close.
Now, the Chinese are developing fast, and in the last 20 years (particularly ten years) they have made tremendous strides (e.g. in terms of materiel, strategy, etc ...for instance their naval game is totally different from what it used to be, with even a foray into AEGIS-esque phased array RADAR anti-air destroyers ....although looking AEGIS-esque doesn't mean they are AEGIS competitive). China has made huge advances and they have the money to continue that ....but that doesn't mean they are light years ahead of Russia, Western Europe or anywhere near the US.
As for StrategyPage ...not a bad website, but NOT to be used as a reference material for ANYTHING. It is basically a BLOG with the articles being opinions of the authors, and those opinions are mostly right (but mostly right means partially wrong).
Linking to StrategyPage is tantamount to JonhsHopkins Hospital linking to a blog that has the 'medical opinions' of a Papua New Guinean witchdoctor! Sure, they are interesting, and in some areas can be accurat-ish, but using it as a baseline would be foolish (at best). A drinking game could be invented where one takes a shot for every error in SP ....guaranteed inebriation if you read all the articles! Potential brain damage if you move forwards and read the forum posts.
Not a 'bad-bad' site (and when they lower the opinions a bit can actually be good) ...but best shelved under 'other viewpoint' rather than 'source.' It is a blog that is organized to appear as 'news' when it is not. Using it as a source is silly. Even the Indian LiveFist military blog is lightyears better than StrategyPage.
Should have copied you in my post above since you started the thread. Only fair. (No attack on you as a person, but there are better websites to be used as sources rather than StrategyPage, which is a blog not a news site).
As for LiveFist, there definitely seem to be a bit less expert commenters there, and hard to know who they are when they're under the Anon tag.