Talk:Silk Way Airlines Flight 995/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Retrolord (talk · contribs) 13:12, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I have reviewed the nomination and failed it. Please address the problems before reonimating. Thanks, ★★Retro Lord ★★ 13:12, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

" informed that the" That doesn't flow very well, could you change that please?

"18 tonnes (18 long tons; 20 short tons)" Can we have a different measurement set-up thing here?

" with base in Bagram" Poor grammar, please change

"at the airport of destination" A bit redundant/unneccessary

"3,500-metre" 3,500 metres

"broke up in 10 to 20 pieces" That doesn't flow very well, can you change it please

"Parvand Province" Why does this link to Parwan province instead?

" Despite a British Major, who was the spokesman for the coalition forces led by the United States in Afghanistan, confirming that no activity from the rebels had been registered in the area of the crash at the time the accident took place,[1] several attempts to reach the crash site were repelled by gunshots" Poor grammar, the sentence is too long, and the second half seems irrelevant

""almost impossible" to be carried out" Redundant 'be' and it needs a citation as its a direct quote

"that the Talibans" Taliban is not pluralised

Sorry, but the above comments/concerns are not sufficient reason to fail the nomination, as they can be easily assessed. What kind of reviewer are you? I'll be raising this matter at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Good articles.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 20:51, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, what kind of reviewer am I. While your at it, report me to arbcom and to the UN, the CIA too.

Further that, what kind of nominator are YOU, if you haven't bothered to proofread before submitting this drivel. ★★Retro Lord ★★ 20:53, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just in case you did not notice it, the article went through a previous review when it was passed for a DYK.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 20:57, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just incase you didn't notice, I don't have much tolerance for people who cannot be bothered proof reading before submitting to WP:GAN. As noted above, report me to the UN please, I think your human rights may have been violated. ★★Retro Lord ★★ 20:58, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Outside comment - Ideally, the lead section of the article should touch on all the subsections; some mention of the Taliban theory should be added. -- Khazar2 (talk) 22:52, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]