Talk:No. 90 Wing RAAF/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Anotherclown (talk · contribs) 10:52, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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:
    • Stephens, Going Solo, p. 249 Multiple references contain the same content
      • That was lingering from an earlier version and is no longer necessary -- tks for picking it up! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:25, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • 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"?
      • Altered -- this was the Australian Defence Committee agreeing amongst its members what it could do, not agreeing officially to Britain's request at this stage. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:25, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
        • 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)[reply]
  • 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:
    • Images used seem fine to me. One is currently being discussed as "possibly unfree" but that is a separate process and I think its appropriate for it to be determined in that forum.
      • That's about how I see it... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:25, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
      • Hopefully all done now -- tks for reviewing, AC. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:25, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • 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)[reply]
          • Tks mate, much appreciated. I first heard of this wing way back in 2007 when I was writing my first serious RAAF bio, on George Jones -- it's taken till this long to get reliable formation and disbandment dates for an article... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:09, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]