Talk:Gubir shootdown/GA1

GA Review

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

Nominator: PenangLion (talk · contribs) 07:04, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: IntentionallyDense (talk · contribs) 15:07, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will be reviewing this shortly. IntentionallyDense (talk) 15:07, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Review

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Between 1968 and 1989, Malaysia was involved in a low-intensity armed insurgency from the Malayan National Liberation Army (MNLA), the military wing of the banned Communist Party of Malaya (CPM), as a continuation of the Malayan Emergency from 1948 to 1960. This sentence doesn't really make sense. Is there a way you could split it up or write in a better way? IntentionallyDense (talk) 17:29, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply] The aircraft was piloted by flight lieutenant Chung Ming Teck and flight lieutenant Wan Munsiff Wan Salim of the RMAF 10th Squadron and carried 11 people, including seven RMAF officers. This seems like a run-on sentence, could you reword it?
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Your lead doesn't really tell me what this article is about. I'm looking for something along the lines of "The Gubir shootdown was..." I highly recommend you read Wikipedia:How to create and manage a good lead section for some extra guidance on creating a lead. IntentionallyDense (talk) 17:29, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	IntentionallyDense (talk) 17:29, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	In 1968, the Sikorsky S-61A-4 Nuri helicopter, a variant of the Sikorsky SH-3 Sea King, was in service by the Royal Malaysian Air Force (RMAF). your sources don't seem to say the full model of the helicopter nor the part about the Sikorsky SH-3 Sea King. IntentionallyDense (talk) 17:29, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply] On 26 October 1970, the RMAF purchased 40 Nuri helicopters for troop transport, cargo carrying and rescue mission purposes. I'm not seeing this in the source.IntentionallyDense (talk) 17:29, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply] Between 1968 and 1989, Malaysia was involved in a low-intensity armed insurgency from the Malayan National Liberation Army (MNLA), the military wing of the banned Communist Party of Malaya (CPM), as a continuation of the Malayan Emergency from 1948 to 1960. Not supported by source. IntentionallyDense (talk) 17:29, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply] Helicopters, notably the Nuri, were deployed in action soon after their introduction, serving casevacs against the insurgency as early as 18 June 1968. Your source says June 17. IntentionallyDense (talk) 17:29, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
	2c. it contains no original research.	per above. IntentionallyDense (talk) 17:29, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Passed Copyvio and no obvious plagiarism when looking at the sources. IntentionallyDense (talk) 17:29, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Just looking at your sources, they go into much more detail than you provide. I feel like you could really get a lot more out of your sources. IntentionallyDense (talk) 17:29, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	IntentionallyDense (talk) 17:29, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	IntentionallyDense (talk) 17:29, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	IntentionallyDense (talk) 17:29, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	IntentionallyDense (talk) 17:29, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	There doesn't seem to be any good free images available so the lead image is okay. I do think it would be helpful to add a map of the area. IntentionallyDense (talk) 17:29, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
	7. Overall assessment.	I'm unfortunately going to have to fail this nomination as I just feel it needs a lot of work. I suggest to improve this article you go back and check your sources more thoroughly. To help you with improving the article here is some guidance in areas where I think this article could be improved: Help:How to mine a source, Wikipedia:How to create and manage a good lead section, Wikipedia:Advanced source searching, Wikipedia:Quotations, Wikipedia:Writing better articles. I really hope me failing your article does not discourage you as I understand that it can be hard to hear but I just don't feel that this article is up to GA standards at this time. IntentionallyDense (talk) 17:29, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]