Talk:Mary Bell (aviator)/GA1
Latest comment: 12 years ago by Ian Rose in topic GA Review
GA Review edit
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Nick-D (talk • contribs • count) 02:07, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
Comments edit
This is a very solid article Ian. I've got a few relatively minor comments though:
- What's a 'Grade 'A' private pilot's licence'?
- What's a 'ground engineer'? (I presume it's the qualification needed to be part of ground crew for aircraft)
- "who had hoped to be able to assist in aircraft maintenance in time of war" is a bit awkward (and the tense seems to swap over in mid-sentence). Something like 'who had volunteered to assist with aircraft maintenance during times of war' might work better.
- Done, tks.
- "Bell continued to lobby, however, along with various women's groups desiring to support the war effort and to free male staff for overseas postings." is also a bit awkward
- Had a go at rephrasing slightly.
- The link to Bell's ADB entry needs to be updated to reflect the recent change in URLs (you might want to use Template:Australian Dictionary of Biography for this).
- Updated link, tks.
- While the coverage is fine for GA class, you might want to use Trove to search for further references if you haven't already done so (if Mary Bell was anything like the rest of the WNEL, there will be quite a few articles about her - many of which will have been self-written!). Nick-D (talk) 02:28, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
- Actually I tried a Trove trawl (always wanted to say that!), as well as a search of the many books I've downloaded from the Air Power Development Centre, in the hopes of finding anything further prior to submitting to GAN, and it didn't seem to add much to what I had already or, where it did, seemed to beg further questions, so I left well enough alone... ;-) Tks for taking the time to review mate! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:40, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
Assessment against GA criteria edit
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. References to sources:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- 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:
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall: