Talk:RAF Northolt/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:49, 28 March 2011 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria[reply]

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
FYI, MOS requires an n-dash between dates and page numbers, but that's not relevant for this review.
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:
Please separate the footnotes from the bibliography. Books need publisher, date of publication and should have place of publication. Standardize presentation of book info. Sometimes the ISBN is inside parentheses and sometimes it isn't.

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:
Don't think that the paragraph on 43 Sqdn in France is relevant to this article.

I thought was good to include as it mentions how the squadron and the personnel from Northolt fared during the war. Harrison49 (talk) 19:06, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps so, but it's pretty irrelevant to a history of the airfield itself. Unlike units that were based at the airfield.
It seems to have been sorted. Harrison49 (talk) 16:43, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Can you add a map showing where the airfield is in relation of London?

I've put in a request for a map for this and RAF Uxbridge at Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Map workshop. Harrison49 (talk) 19:06, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As an alternative, there is the drop-down map which comes from the coordinates at the top of the article. Harrison49 (talk) 16:38, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Overall:
Pass or Fail: