Talk:1946 Australian National Airways DC-3 crash/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Grandiose (talk · contribs) 11:07, 6 December 2011 (UTC) I'll be conducting a full review shortly. My initial observations are that the lead needs expanding to provide a better summary of the article - such as the inquiry - per WP:LEAD. I'm also not enamoured with the number of notes - I feel a number could be included in the text - but this doesn't fall under any of the criteria. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 11:07, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Image check: all fine. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 11:45, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sources and referencing all fine. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 22:04, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, so I note the lead problem is still extant. Also, the number of single sentence paragraphs should be minimised per WP:LAYOUT; here, it is excessive: the paragraphs mostly deal with similar content and could be merged. The general standard of the prose is good, I'll check for any small mistakes shortly. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 22:12, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article contained three single-sentence-paragraphs. All three have now been eliminated by merging them with adjacent paragraphs - see the diff. I will expand the lead paragraph if someone will give a hint about what information should be added. Dolphin (t) 07:15, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The investigation, inquiry and recommendations, as mentioned by me above. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 17:34, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm working on it. Dolphin (t) 12:19, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. See the diff. Dolphin (t) 05:36, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you're happy with the small tweaks I've made, I'm happy to pass. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 12:01, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your tweaks. I have only one concern and that is your use of the expression all similar aircraft. This is ambiguous because it could be referring to aircraft of the Douglas DC-3 type, or it could include types of similar-looking aircraft in commercial operation in Australia at the time, such as the Lockheed Lodestar. In fact, the Department of Civil Aviation's actions were directed only at Douglas DC-3 aircraft so I think it is important for the article to identify the aircraft type rather than use the imprecise expression all similar aircraft. The Department's actions were directed only at DC-3 aircraft registered in Australia, and not at DC-3 aircraft registered in any other country, but that is not mentioned in any of the source documents so I concede it should be omitted. Dolphin (t) 22:15, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that seems sensible. Passing. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 22:19, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your efforts and participation in this exercise! Dolphin (t) 22:29, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]