Talk:Battle of Madang/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Anotherclown (talk · contribs) 09:25, 5 December 2017 (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 no errors (no action req'd)
- Disambiguations: no dabs - [3] (no action req'd)
- Linkrot: No dead links - [4] (no action req'd).
- Alt text: Images lack alt text so you might consider adding it - [5] (suggestion only, not a GA req)
- Copyright violations: The Earwig Tool reveals no issues with copyright violations or close paraphrasing [6] (no action req'd).
- Duplicate links: no duplicate links to be removed.
Criteria
[edit]- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
b (MoS):
- Slight inconsistency in the infobox with flag for Japanese commander and no flag in Allied column. Perhaps don't need either?
- I think there might be a missing word here: " the area had been placed Australian administration in 1920 and had subsequently been renamed...".
- Use of double negative here could probably be improved: "...it was not impassable particularly on foot..."
- Repetitive wording here: "...terrain is less rugged than the Finisterre Range to the south and there are no especially high features, although the terrain..." ("the terrain").
- Wording is a little clunky here: "...bypass Saidor following the Landing at Saidor by US troops...", suggest something like "...bypass Saidor following the landing there by US troops..."
- "In the early stages of the pursuit, the Australians sent long range patrols..." hyphenate "long-range" (per my Macquarie Dictionary at least).
- "11th Division's divisional carrier company..." perhaps wikilink carrier here to Universal Carrier?
- "...Several artillery rounds were fired..." I assume by the Japanese at the Australians? Perhaps clarify?
- "...cracked inaccurately..." language seems a little too descriptive here for an encyclopedia entry.
- "...since the fighting around Kokoda and Buna–Gona..." maybe add wikilinks here for the Kokoda Campaign and Battle of Buna-Gona?
- No MOS issues that I could see.
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references):
b (citations to reliable sources):
c (OR):
- No issues. Article is well referenced and looks to reflect the sources available.
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects):
b (focused):
- Most major aspects of the topic seem to be covered that I could see.
- Article is focused and doesn't go into unnecessary detail.
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- a (fair representation):
b (all significant views):
- No POV issues.
- All significant views are covered.
- a (fair representation):
- It is stable.
- No edit wars etc.:
- No issues.
- No edit wars etc.:
- 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 are appropriate for article and are PD and have the req'd documentation.
- Captions look ok.
- a (tagged and captioned):
- Overall:
- a Pass/Fail:
- This looks pretty good to me, and I only have a few points about prose above. Otherwise I made a few minor edits [7]. Anotherclown (talk) 09:52, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
- @Anotherclown: Thanks for taking this on, AC. I've made the suggested changes, including adding alt text. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:32, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
- Changes look fine, passing now. Anotherclown (talk) 08:17, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
- @Anotherclown: Thanks for taking this on, AC. I've made the suggested changes, including adding alt text. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:32, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
- a Pass/Fail: