Jump to content

Talk:1st Armoured Regiment (Australia)/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: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:49, 31 July 2010 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria[reply]

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance:
    Some refs need place of publication.
I think this is done now. Anotherclown (talk) 09:09, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    What makes australian-armour.com reliable?
Probably nothing... I have removed the cites where possible and added Hopkins (which I had at home so now I'm back from overseas I have been able to use it). I believe it is now only used for the more of the trivial information (i.e. regimental marches etc in the infobox). Not sure I can find any refs to replace these but I will have a look. Anotherclown (talk) 09:09, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Replaced a few more. Anotherclown (talk) 07:37, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The things cited by australian-armour.com are now trivial enough not to matter, IMO.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:11, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  1. C. No original research:
  2. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    Add something about WW2 service to the lede. When exactly did it get its Centurions? The structure in the late '50s is a bit unclear. Did it only have B and C Squadrons after A was disbanded? If so, then when was A reformed?
WW2 mentioned in the lede, and I have now clarified arrival date of the Centurions in 1952. Also added info on raising of Sqns in the 1950s and clarified the re-raising of A Sqn in 1968. Anotherclown (talk) 09:09, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also added a bit more on WW2 ops in the prose with refs to Hopkins. Anotherclown (talk) 07:37, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  1. B. Focused:
  2. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  3. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  4. 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:
    A photo of a M-1 would be useful.
Will see what I can do. Anotherclown (talk) 09:09, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just to jump in, I've been looking for a PD photo of an Australian M-1 for the last few years, but without any success. Nick-D (talk) 10:30, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers Nick, yeah not having much luck either. There are plenty of images on the Defence site but fair use might be difficult to establish. Had a look through the US DoD site in the hope they might have something from Talisman Saber last year but to no avail... Anotherclown (talk) 05:52, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
Thanks again for taking the time to review the article and for your fixes and suggestions. Cheers. Anotherclown (talk) 21:12, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:1st_Armoured_Regiment_(Australia)/GA1&oldid=377368753"