Jump to content

Talk:2001 Avjet Gulfstream III crash/GA2

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

Starting review. Pyrotec (talk) 14:14, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Initial comments

[edit]

The problems with lack of in-line citations in some sections, which led to GA-status being withdrawn at WP:GAR appear to have been addressed. I will now carry out a more detailed review of this article. Pyrotec (talk) 19:59, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Overall summary

[edit]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    Yes
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    Yes. However, Ref 1, which is invoked 12 times, is a 41 page PDF file. A page number, or pages numbers, aught to be provided each time this reference is called. This might mean moving the reference as a whole into, say, a source page and then grouping the in-line citations into "clusters" of the same page or range of pages, such as NSTB pages 2-3, NSTB pages 25-27, etc.
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

Congratulations on the quality of the article. I'm awarding GA-status. Pyrotec (talk) 21:30, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the GA renewal and your effort. Crum375 (talk) 22:13, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]