Talk:Flight 105 UFO sighting/GA1

GA Review

Passed. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 20:14, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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

Reviewer: PCN02WPS (talk · contribs) 17:17, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this nomination in the coming days. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 17:17, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

The lead is a little short, a full paragraph would be appropriate for an article of this length, perhaps with a little more context about the contents of the page.
References don't need to appear in the lead, just make sure the same content is repeated in the body of the article and sourced there.

Background

This section contains no citations.
"The Kenneth Arnold UFO sighting occurred on June 24, 1947, when private pilot Kenneth Arnold claimed..." → repetition
"at speeds that Arnold estimated at a minimum of 1,200 miles an hour" → repetition
"flying disc" is given in italics in the first paragraph and quotes in the second, is there a reason for this?

Sighting

"At 8:04 PM (PST), United Airlines Flight 105 took off" → should be "p.m." per MOS:TIME
"from Boise, Idaho bound" → comma after "Idaho" per MOS:GEOCOMMA
"Crew later witnessed" → sounds like it's missing a word, perhaps "The crew"?
link Ontario, Oregon

Aftermath

This section suffers from WP:PROSELINE, so some reformatting to eliminate this would be good.
"Capt. E.J. Smith's first-hand account" → there's no reason to abbreviate his title here, and his name is already given in "Sighting", so IMO the best way to reference him would be "Captain Smith" or just "Smith".
should not be a space between the period and reference or between the references themselves after the first sentence.
link Idaho Statesman
link FBI; eliminate space after period and before reference

Thank you so much! I'll be fixing these issues in the coming days! :D Feoffer (talk) 04:45, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay! See what you think!! I believe I got 'em all. Feoffer (talk) 22:10, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Feoffer the changes you've made look good and I made one additional tweak myself that I didn't spot before (or that was added recently). My only other issue is the newspaper sources; while formatting and reference titles are not covered by the GA criteria, the newspaper sources (3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 13, 14) should be linked to clippings so that the story being sourced is immediately obvious. At present the links to the papers are great but all that I've checked just link to the front page of each paper, not to the story itself, and there is no indication as to which page the story is on within the reference.

If you want to replace the reference name (for example, "8 Jul 1947, 1 - The Spokesman Review at Newspapers.com" in reference 3) with the headline or name of the particular story/article you're referencing in each case, that would be awesome, but as I said above it's technically not part of the GA criteria so I won't hold up the nomination for that in particular. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 02:28, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Great feedback! I've added headlines to all the references, and I've added links to clips for all the 20th-century articles! Feoffer (talk) 09:04, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, I think with that we are good to go. Well done! PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 20:13, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.