Talk:2001 Avjet Gulfstream III crash/GA2

GA Review

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

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

Initial comments

The problems with lack of in-line citations in some sections, which led to GA-status being withdrawn at WP:GAR appear to have been addressed.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)

Overall summary

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)

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