Talk:James Dutton (Royal Marines officer)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Thurgate (talk) 16:33, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
prose: (MoS):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Comments

1. should brigadier be General brigadier?

No, the rank is Brigadier. It's not considered a general officer rank, unlike the equivalent Brigadier General in other forces.

2. The Pentagon. Suggest - A link for this.

Done

3. served as. Suggest - he served as

Done

4. with seniority from October 1975. As in command of the unit?

No, this is seniority in his rank, which determines dates of promotion

5. [ISAF]. Does ISAF need to be brackets?

Yes, because the passage is a quote from Dutton, but he didn't specifically say ISAF. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:12, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow you to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns. Thurgate (talk) 16:33, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the review. I'd be keen to take this article further, so are there any other issues that might need to be sorted before it could get beyond GA? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:12, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, to be honest I'm not the best person to ask, but I could see more details of his career pre 9/11 as a help and also another picture would be nice somewhere.

Anyway, nice article and good luck taking it further. Passed. Thurgate (talk) 17:22, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]