Talk:Leif J. Sverdrup/GA1
GA Review[edit]
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Ian Rose (talk) 06:16, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- Aside from my usual copyedit, just a couple of things:
- Should The Sverdrup Medal of the Society of American Military Engineers really have capital "t" for "The"?
- I can handle many of Sverdrup's accomplishments continue to serve their missions, but a silent testimony to his engineering skills sounds a bit like a promotional blurb... ;-)
- Aside from my usual copyedit, just a couple of things:
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
- It is stable.
- No edit wars etc.:
- It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
- a (tagged and captioned): b (lack of images does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):
- I don't think just repeating the original description found on AWM for the Aitape picture is a great idea; for a start it's partly future tense, which doesn't sit well in an encyclopedic article. At the least, I'd modify "who will control" and preferably drop the anecdotal "who squeezed into Wurtsmith's Lightning".
- a (tagged and captioned): b (lack of images does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):