Talk:Military career of Ian Smith/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Anotherclown (talk · contribs) 09:18, 28 April 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 a few issues with reference consolidation:
  • {{Harvnb |Smith |1997 |p=10}} Multiple references contain the same content
  • {{Harvnb |Berlyn |1978 |pp=67–71}} Multiple references contain the same content
  • berlyn6771 Multiple references are using the same name

All fixed —Cliftonian (talk) 11:21, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

• Disambiguations: no dab links [3] (no action required).
• Linkrot: external links check out [4] (no action required).
• Alt text: Images all lack alt text so you might consider adding it [5] (suggestion only - not a GA criteria).
  • Done —Cliftonian (talk) 11:21, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
• Copyright violations: The Earwig Tool reveals no issues [6] (no action required).
• Duplicate links: one duplicate which should be removed per WP:REPEATLINK:
  • Gwelo
    • fixed —Cliftonian (talk) 11:21, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Criteria

• It is reasonably well written.

  a (prose): b (MoS):

  • Presentation of names of RAF squadrons seems inconsistent with other articles. I believe we generally follow the format "No. X Squadron RAF" per the articles on these units.
  • This is little informal: "were very keen to put on uniform", perhaps consider something like "keen to enlist"?
  • " It was moved back to the Western Desert Campaign in North Africa...", consider instead something like "It was again committed to the Western Desert Campaign in North Africa..."
  • "... causing Smith to lose control of the plane and to crash...", try "... causing Smith to lose control of the plane and crash."
  • "...The unit was at this time..." → "...At this time the unit was..."
  • "... led a strafing raid into a large railway yard..." → "... led a strafing raid against a large railway yard..."
  • "...and his aeroplane was hit by enemy flak...", consider "aircraft" instead.
  • "...He shouted over the radio to the other RAF pilots...", → "...He shouted over the radio to the other pilots..."
  • "... hoping to ditch his plane in the sea..." → "...hoping to ditch in the sea..."
  • "... Realising that his fighter..." → "...Realising his fighter..."
  • "... Smith decided to jump out..." consider "bale out" instead.
  • "...In her 1978 biography of Smith, Phillippa Berlyn writes...", should just be "Berlyn" rm first name at subsequent uses after full introduction at first use IAW WP:SURNAME
  • Repetitive: "Smith's bodily injuries in the 1943 plane crash made him permanently unable to sit for long periods without pain...", already mentioned the injuries were the result of a crash in 1943. Consider instead: "Smith's injuries also made him permanently unable to sit for long periods without pain..."
  • Also informal: "His years as an RAF flyboy...", consider instead "His years as an RAF pilot..."
    • Okay, all suggestions put in (thanks for these, all good calls) —Cliftonian (talk) 11:21, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

• It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

  • All major points cited using WP:RS.
  • Footnote 1 needs a reference.
    • OK —Cliftonian (talk) 11:21, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Citation 45 Wood 2008, pp. 1–8 - should this be Wood 2005?
    • No, error on my part —Cliftonian (talk) 11:21, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
  • A few of the references use lower case. These should use title case.
    • OK —Cliftonian (talk) 11:21, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
  • ISBNs are presented inconsistently as some have hypthens and others don't.
    • OK —Cliftonian (talk) 11:21, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
  • No issues with OR.

• It is broad in its coverage.

  a (major aspects): b (focused):

  • Most major points seem to be covered without going into undue detail.

• 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 used are either licensed or in the public domain and seem appropriate for the article.
  • Wonder if there are any PD photos of Smith that could be included in the article?
    • There is a wartime photo of him in his RAF uniform in The Quiet Man that I think is PD; I will see if I can get it scanned for the infobox. For now I have put a 1990 picture of him in the last section of the article. —Cliftonian (talk) 11:21, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
      • Sounds promising. The one you have will do for now though. Anotherclown (talk) 10:52, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

• Overall:

  a Pass/Fail:

  • Looks quite good, just needs a bit of a copyedit. Anotherclown (talk) 10:43, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
    • Thank you very much for the very quick and helpful review. I hope I have rectified satisfactorily all the issues above. Thanks and have a great rest of the weekend! —Cliftonian (talk) 11:21, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
      • Those changes look fine. Have passed the review now. Anotherclown (talk) 10:52, 29 April 2013 (UTC)