Talk:1st Parachute Battalion (Australia)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Anotherclown (talk) 06:55, 21 December 2010 (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: none found - [3] (no action required)
• Linkrot: Ext links all work - [4] (no action required)
• Alt text: Images lack alt text (although this is not a requirement for GA anyway so its up to you if you want to add it or not) - [5] (no action required)

• I've added this in now. AustralianRupert (talk) 10:29, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Criteria

• It is reasonably well written.

  a (prose): b (MoS):

  • The Advisor script reports one nbsp-dash that should be fixed;
  • This sentence in the lead is a little shakey for mine: "Formed in early 1943, and despite achieving a high level of readiness, the battalion did not see action during the war and was disbanded in 1946." Maybe reword to something like: "Formed in early 1943, the battalion did not see action during the war despite achieving a high level of readiness, and it was subsequently disbanded in 1946."
  • Is a citation really required in the lead - IMO all the relevant infomation is citated in the body of the article so I think it could probably be removed? Usually these should be avoided per WP:LEAD.
  • This paragraph is a little repetitive: "These volunteers completed their parachute training with 1st Parachute Training Unit before joining the unit." (unit used twice);
  • I'm not entirely sure by what is meant in this sentence: "As Australia's first airborne battalion required extensive training, in addition to training in airborne operations at Richmond, the battalion also trained in jungle warfare at Canungra in Queensland." Maybe reword?
  • IMO the third and fourth paragraphs could be merged as they are both fairly short and relate to the battalion's potenital operational service;
  • This sentence doesn't quite work for me: "The battalion was also warned in early 1945 to prepare for a mission to rescue thousands of Allied prisoners held by the Japanese at Sandakan in North Borneo." Maybe reword to something like: "The battalion was also warned to prepare for a mission to rescue thousands of Allied prisoners held by the Japanese at Sandakan in North Borneo in early 1945."
  • I don't think the 'however' is required in this sentence: "While an advance party of 120 men arrived in Singapore on 9 September, the remainder of the battalion remained in Australia however." (maybe just delete it?); and
  • This sentence is a little repetitive: "Orders were received to disband the battalion on 29 January 1946, and it was disbanded at Sydney a day later." (disband used twice)
    • I think I've responded to all of these. AustralianRupert (talk) 10:29, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
      • Yep that looks fine. I fixed a couple of typos and changed a few words as well. Anotherclown (talk) 21:20, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

• It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

• It is broad in its coverage.

  a (major aspects): b (focused):

  • This is a fairly short article but given the units fairly limited service history and the fact that it was not used operationally IMO all the major points are adequately covered.

• It follows the neutral point of view policy.

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

• It is stable.

  No edit wars etc.:

• 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':

• Overall:

  a Pass/Fail:

  • IMO this article just needs a few tweaks to prose, but otherwise meets the GA criteria. Please have a look at my suggestions above and let me know how you go. Cheers. Anotherclown (talk) 07:23, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
    • Hi, thanks for taking the time to review this. I have made a few adjustments, please let me know if there is anything else that you think needs to be done. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:29, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
      • All issues have been taken care of so I'm happy to promote to GA. Well done. Anotherclown (talk) 21:20, 21 December 2010 (UTC)