Talk:Operation USA/GA1

GA Review

Initial review by Dbiel

I have taken some time to review the article and made some minor edits in the process. The article looks fairly good to me, but I do not consider myself a qualifed reviewer; but I will make two suggestions in the following subsections, References and Closing Section. I found the article to be very informative and well documented. Dbiel ^(Talk) 18:33, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

A featured article exemplifies our very best work and features professional standards of writing and presentation. In addition to meeting the requirements for all Wikipedia articles, it has the following attributes:

  1. It is—
         * (a) well-written: its prose is engaging, even brilliant, and of a professional standard;
         * (b) comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details;
         * (c) factually accurate: claims are verifiable against reliable sources, accurately represent the relevant body of published knowledge, and are supported with specific evidence and external citations; this requires a "References" section in which sources are listed, complemented by inline citations where appropriate;
         * (d) neutral: it presents views fairly and without bias; and
         * (e) stable: it is not subject to ongoing edit wars and its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured article process.
  2. It follows the style guidelines, including the provision of:
         * (a) a lead—a concise lead section that summarizes the topic and prepares the reader for the detail in the subsequent sections;
         * (b) appropriate structure—a system of hierarchical headings and a substantial but not overwhelming table of contents (see section help); and
         * (c) consistent citations—where required by Criterion 1c, consistently formatted inline citations using either footnotes[1] or Harvard referencing (Smith 2007, p. 1) (see citing sources for suggestions on formatting references; for articles with footnotes, the meta:cite format is recommended).
  3. Images. It has images and other media where appropriate, with succinct captions and acceptable copyright status. Non-free images or media must satisfy the criteria for inclusion of non-free content and be labeled accordingly.
  4. Length. It stays focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

I believe the article now fits these criteria. Wattssw (talk) 17:51, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

References

The retrieved dates used in the references need to be changed to proper format to avoid red links. Day and Month must be in two digit format so 2008-6-6 needs to be changed to 2008-06-06 Dbiel ^(Talk) 18:33, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I used Cntrl + F to find all the dates and added 0's where needed. Wattssw (talk) 05:18, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Closing Section

I would recommend adding a closing section to wrap up the article, but after looking as some featured articles, this may not be required. Dbiel ^(Talk) 18:33, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I cannot find any place where a conclusion is given as part of a good or featured article, so I don't think its necessary. Wattssw (talk) 17:49, 16 July 2008 (UTC)