Talk:Tesco bomb campaign/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Der yck C. 23:10, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the title on WP:GAN and thought, hmmm, interesting article. I ended up reading all of it, and so I might as well review it.

Not found in cited source, please provide additional citation (or prove me wrong)

Operation Hornbill, was one of the most secretive ever undertaken by Dorset Police
- Added separate inline footnote number to this one. --Der yck C. 21:47, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
a bomb disposal team from the British Army was despatched to the scene
the Army's bomb disposal team was stationed in Bournemouth—something that only usually happens when political party conferences are held in the town—and placed on stand-by
- These three are all in the first source—the ITV documetary transcript
was a 51-year-old widower
- Age is in the BBC article "Tesco blackmail 'bomber' jailed"; widower cited (the source doesn't use the word, but says His wife Erika died at the family home in November 1992...

A few more citations and we are there!

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
(I don't think it's really possible for any original research to exist on this kind of articles.)
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
Having finished reading the story on this article doesn't leave me wanting, so that's a pass.
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):
I can believe that there are no free images relevant to this article, so (6) is irrelevant.
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

This article currently relies heavily on 3 web sources. This reliance may hinder further progress and promotion of this article.
Indeed, but the sources cited are about the only decent ones on the subject, though I will dig to see if I can find more. Offline sources are alongshot, though.
To meet further standards, inline citations for the lead section may be necessary.
I always write my lead after I write the body so that it's a summary of the body. Since all the information is in the body, it shouldn't require citations.
If available, more details about the cryptic Mensa-style messages may be useful. --Der yck C. 23:10, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That would be interesting to know now you mention it, I'll see if I can find anything. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:01, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't mind seeing an image or two in the article as well, even if it's only of a Tesco store, or a locality in which police made a search. It's not a must but images do tend to make articles more attractive. Gatoclass (talk) 15:51, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll see what I can find. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:01, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to both of you for your comments. The title and the layout caused me a few headaches—any comments on those? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:01, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what headaches the title and layout have caused you. What's the problem? --Der yck C. 21:47, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't sure what to call it, and I'm more used to writing biogrpahies, so I struggled a little with what to call the section headers. It all seems to have worked out, but I was just wondering if you would do things any differently. Other than that, I think I've got all your concerns and even managed to find a couple of images. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:41, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article name is fine as there isn't another article about a different Tesco bomb scare on Wikipedia. I've done a bit of spellcheck on the non-free image. The article is now promoted to GA status. --Der yck C. 16:14, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]