Talk:Virgin Atlantic Little Red/GA2
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: White Arabian Filly (talk · contribs) I have 4 GAs now, so I propose to begin reviewing in order to help with the backlog. White Arabian Filly Neigh 22:34, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
GA criteria
[edit]| Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Well-written: | ||
|
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. |  Yes; article is written in British English, but it's about a British subject so that is entirely appropriate.
|
|
|
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | Yes. I do not see any problem words like "currently".
|
| 2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
|
|
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | All content is sourced.
|
|
|
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | All sources appear reliable.
|
|
|
2c. it contains no original research. | No OR detected.
|
|
|
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | No copyvio or close paraphrasing detected.
|
| 3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
|
|
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | Yes, goes into depth on multiple aspects of the topic.
|
|
|
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | Yes; gives good coverage of the topic.
|
|
|
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | Article is neutral.
|
|
|
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | No recent edit wars or POV pushing.
|
| 6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
|
|
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | Images are correctly licensed for use in the article.
|
|
|
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | The photo and logo are appropriate and so are the captions.
|
|
7. Overall assessment. | Article meets all criteria. Congrats! |
Comments
[edit]Overall, a well-written article. I have only these concerns:
- In the table, wouldn't it be easier to use citations at the end of each line than putting them below the whole table?
- The citations support all content of the table. SSTflyer 00:01, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
- I think the lead could use a bit more detail about the operation of the airline.
- This article is quite short (5535 characters), so I think the length of the lead section is adequate. SSTflyer 00:01, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
White Arabian Filly Neigh 22:55, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Ok. Thanks for being so quick to reply. White Arabian Filly Neigh 15:06, 14 June 2016 (UTC)