Talk:Arthur William Murphy/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: AustralianRupert (talk) 20:38, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status. AustralianRupert (talk) 21:23, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Progression[edit]

  • Version of the article when originally reviewed: [1]
  • Version of the article when review was closed: [2]

Technical review[edit]

  • no dabs found by the tools
  • ext links all work;
  • alt text is present;
  • spot checks reveal no copyright violations.

Criteria[edit]

  • It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  • in the Early life and World War I section, "Crediting with bringing down two enemy aircraft while supporting Lawrence's troops, Murphy was awarded". I think this might sound better as: "Credited with bringing down...";
  • in the Early life section, perhaps "commission" might be wikilinked to Officer (armed forces);
  • in the Between the wars section, "Darwin" and "Port Darwin" - seems inconsistent;
  • in the Between the wars section, "he was commissioned a Flying Officer in September that year" - perhaps "commissioned as a Flying Officer"?
  • in the Between the wars section, "Promoted Flight Lieutenant, Murphy was posted" - perhaps "Promoted to Flight Lieutenant"?
  • in the World War II section, I think the link to Group Captain could possibly be removed as it is already linked above in the previous section;
  • in the References, endashes might be added to the year ranges for the Cutlack and Mellor works;
  • Heh, that first one looks like a typo; no issues with the others, wilco. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:18, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  • No issues.
  • It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  • No issues.
  • No issues.
  • It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
  • No issues.
  • 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:
  • No issues.
  • Overall:
    a Pass/Fail:
  • Looks very good, just a couple of suggestions/points to look at. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 21:23, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tks as usual for review, will take care of those points shortly. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:18, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's all done now, I think. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:33, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]