Jump to content

Talk:East Indies theatre of the French Revolutionary Wars/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Tomandjerry211 (alt) (talk · contribs) 23:27, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Will start soon.--Tomandjerry211 (alt) (talk) 23:27, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    Please use either BrE or AmE
  1. Duplicate links to French Revolution, Dutch Cape Colony, Penang, HMS Victorious, HMS Arrogant, HMS Sybille, HMS Fox, HMS Sceptre, Houghly River, HMS Jupiter, and HMS Tremendous.
  • Ok, I've eliminated the second on French Revolution, which was an error. However, the rest of these are relatively obscure links which appear in very different sections and I think that a reader would prefer to have these links where they are. As far as I understand it, the overlinking rules are guidelines subject to editor discretion rather than definitive instructions, and I'd prefer to leave these as they are.--Jackyd101 (talk) 23:21, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Split the first paragraph in the lead.
    Remove the location parameter in an image if it says "right".
  • I've done this, but I'm not entirely sure why it was necessary. What was harmed by leaving the "rights" in place?
  1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    Citation #115 should be a note
  • Its debateable, but in every other article I've used this metric, including some featured articles, this has gone in the references (as its a reference to a source rather than commentary). I'd rather keep it where it is.
  1. Sources #4 and #7 in the bibliography should have the "ref=harv" parameter removed
  2. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  3. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  4. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  5. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
    First two images in article lack U.S PD tags
  6. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    --Tomandjerry211 (alt) (talk) 23:47, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review, I've left a number of comments and questions - if I haven't queried the point, its been addressed. Best--Jackyd101 (talk) 23:21, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]