Talk:14th/32nd Battalion (Australia)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Anotherclown (talk · contribs) 08:34, 22 October 2011 (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 no errors (no action required).
• Disambiguations: no dab links [3] (no action required).
• Linkrot: External links check out [4] (no action required).
• Alt text: images lack alt text so you might consider adding it [5] (suggestion only).
• Copyright violations: The Earwig Tool is currently not working, however spot checks using Google searches reveal no issues (no action required).

Criteria

• It is reasonably well written.

  a (prose): b (MoS):

  • "Upon formation the battalion adopted the territorial title of the "Prahran/Footscray Regiment" and they were assigned to the 6th Brigade, 4th Division...", consider "Upon formation the battalion adopted the territorial title of the "Prahran/Footscray Regiment" and was assigned to the 6th Brigade, 4th Division."
  • "The Japanese position sat atop a 600 feet (180 m) hill...", "600 feet" is used as an adjective here so it should be "600-foot". This can be done by using the adj=on parameter in the {{convert}} template.
  • "and machine gun and mortar fire...", specifically "machine gun" should be hypthenated per the Macquirie dictionary (i.e. "machine-gun").
  • "an outflanking move...", would this read better as "a flanking move"?
  • "machine gun" here too: "came under intense machine gun fire as they attempted to round Mount Sugi..."
  • wording here seems a little problematic: "but after two hours they too came under intense machine gun fire as they attempted to round Mount Sugi and attack the Japanese from the rear, forcing it to dig-in to the north of Bacon Hill." Consider "but after two hours they too came under intense machine-gun fire as they attempted to round Mount Sugi and attack the Japanese from the rear, forcing them to dig-in to the north of Bacon Hill."
  • "At this point the situation for the attackers became quite desperate...", consider "At this point the situation became desperate for the attackers..."

• It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

  • All main points are supported by inline citations using WP:RS.
  • Consistent citation style used throughout article.

• It is broad in its coverage.

  a (major aspects): b (focused):

  • Coverage seems sufficient.

• It follows the neutral point of view policy.

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

  • No issues detected with POV.

• It is stable.

  No edit wars etc.:

  • No issues here either.

• 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:

  • All images appear to be PD and are appropriate for the article.

• Overall:

  a Pass/Fail:

  • A couple of minor points re wording. Otherwise this is succint and well-written article which meets all of the GA criteria in my opinion. Happy to promote once the last few points have been dealt with / discussed. Anotherclown (talk) 12:58, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
    • Thanks for the review. I think I've covered off on all your points. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 13:13, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
      • Looks good, passing now. Anotherclown (talk) 13:28, 22 October 2011 (UTC)