Talk:John Plagis/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Anotherclown (talk · contribs) 21:02, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Progression

• Version of the article when originally reviewed: [1]
• Version of the article when review was closed: [2]

Technical review

• Citations: The Citation Check tool reveals one error with reference consolidation:
  • lg031144 (Multiple references are using the same name)
• Disambiguations: one dab link [3]:
  • Wing Commander
• Linkrot: external links check out [4] (no action req'd).
• Alt text: Images all lack alt text so you might consider adding it [5] (not a GA req'ment - suggestion only).
• Copyright violations: The Earwig Tool reveals no issues with copyright violations or close paraphrasing [6] (no action req'd).
• Duplicate links: one duplicate link:
  • flight lieutenant
    • all OK —Cliftonian (talk) 17:52, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Criteria

• It is reasonably well written.

  a (prose): b (MoS):

  • The lead is a little repetitive. Probably no requirement to state that he won 11 victories over Malta twice in two separate paragraphs. Perhaps remove one instance?
    • OK —Cliftonian (talk) 17:52, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Redundant language here: "After he and the squadron converted to flying Mustang IIIs, he commanded a wing of Mustangs based at RAF Bentwaters that supported bombing missions....", consider instead: "After converting to flying Mustang IIIs, he commanded a wing based at RAF Bentwaters that supported bombing missions."
    • OK —Cliftonian (talk) 17:52, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
  • "With Malta looking increasingly precarious...", consider instead "With the defence of Malta looking increasingly precarious..."
  • "The Luftwaffe launched a major attack against the key Maltese airfields...", consider instead "The Luftwaffe launched a major attack against key Maltese airfields..."
  • Redundant language here: "Plagis was promoted to flight lieutenant on 4 June 1942 and concurrently transferred to No. 185 Squadron to command "B" Flight." Consider removing "concurrently".
  • Further repetition in the body of the article IRT to his number of victories. "...his tally for the war was recorded as 16..." and "Plagis ended the war with a tally of 16 enemy aircraft confirmed destroyed..." Suggest removing the first instance and leaving the second.
    • All OK —Cliftonian (talk) 17:52, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

• It is factually accurate and verifiable.

  a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

  • All major points cited using WP:RS.
  • No issues with OR.
  • You use a short cite titled "Lucas 1981, p. 262." however there is no corresponding listing in the reference section. Could it be added?
  • Could page numbers be added for the "Charousis 2010" short citations?
    • All OK —Cliftonian (talk) 17:52, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

• It is broad in its coverage.

  a (major aspects): b (focused):

  • Most major points seem to be covered without going into undue detail.
  • Level of coverage seems appropriate.

• It follows the neutral point of view policy.

  a (fair representation): b (all significant views):

  • No issues here.

• It is stable.

  No edit wars etc.:

  • No issues here.

• It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.

  a (tagged and captioned): b (Is illustrated with appropriate images): c (non-free images have fair use rationales): d public domain pictures appropriately demonstrate why they are public domain:

  • Images are all PD and seem appropriate to the article.

• Overall:

  a Pass/Fail:

  • Just a few minor prose and technical issues and a couple of tweaks to the references req'd, otherwise fine. Happy to discuss anything you disagree with or need clarified. Anotherclown (talk) 22:10, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Hi, sorry about the delay, just got back now from a week or so in a place without internet. I've put replies above, I hope all of this is adequate. Thank you for the great review and I hope you are well and having a pleasant week. —Cliftonian (talk) 17:52, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
    • No worries at all. Changes looks good so I'm passing now. Anotherclown (talk) 10:50, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
      • Thank you very much again for the review. —Cliftonian (talk) 10:57, 24 September 2013 (UTC)