Talk:No. 90 Wing RAAF/GA1
GA Review[edit]
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Anotherclown (talk · contribs) 10:52, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
Progression[edit]
- Version of the article when originally reviewed: [1]
- Version of the article when review was closed: [2]
Technical review[edit]
- Citations: The Citation Check tool reveals one issue with reference consolidation:
- Disambiguations: no dab links [3] (no action required).
- Linkrot: external links check out [4] (no action required).
- Alt text: Images all lack alt text so you might consider adding it [5] (suggestion only - not a GA criteria).
- Copyright violations: The Earwig Tool reveals no issues [6] (no action required).
- Duplicate links: no duplicate links (no action req'd).
Criteria[edit]
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- "...Australia agreed in April 1950 that it could commit a squadron...", "could" or "would"?
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- All major points cited using WP:RS.
- No issues with OR.
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- Most major points seem to be covered without going into undue detail.
- I wonder if Operation Kingly Pile (21 Feb 56) should be mentioned as it was the most successful of the more than 4,000 sorties completed by the Lincolns? According to Coulthard-Clark, The Encyclopaedia of Australia's Battles, 2010, p. 270, 18 CTs were apparently killed in a raid conducted by No. 1 Sqn RAAF and Canberras from No. 12 Sqn RAF. Interestingly this raid does not rate a mention in the official history though. (suggestion only).
- You're right, it was a big thing for 1 Sqn and the Malayan involvement in general, and Stephens and Eather both mention it; I just didn't use it here it because it took place well after the disbandment of 90 Wing... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:25, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
- I didn't pick that up - blast. Yes you are of course completely right it shouldn't be included here. Anotherclown (talk) 09:49, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
- You're right, it was a big thing for 1 Sqn and the Malayan involvement in general, and Stephens and Eather both mention it; I just didn't use it here it because it took place well after the disbandment of 90 Wing... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:25, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
- No issues here.
- It is stable.
- No edit wars etc.:
- No issues here.
- It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
- a (tagged and captioned): b (Is illustrated with appropriate images): c (non-free images have fair use rationales): d public domain pictures appropriately demonstrate why they are public domain:
- Overall:
- a Pass/Fail:
- Looks very good to me. Only a couple of minor issues / suggestions to deal with / discuss. Anotherclown (talk) 12:00, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
- Hopefully all done now -- tks for reviewing, AC. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:25, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
- Too easy, passing now. Quite an interesting article about one of the more obscure episodes in RAAF history. Anotherclown (talk) 09:49, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
- Hopefully all done now -- tks for reviewing, AC. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:25, 29 April 2013 (UTC)