Talk:Station Group Banak/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Parsecboy (talk · contribs) 21:53, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   Some things that are italicized don't need to be ("Luftwaffe", "Wehrmacht" are both common enough in English), but others aren't and need to be (Operation Nordlicht).

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

   "to deploy two battalions consisting of 10,000 men" - this may be different in Norway, but battalions are fairly small units (around a thousand or fewer men). Should this be two brigades?

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Just a few small nitpicks, otherwise this article looks ready to go. Good job. Parsecboy (talk) 21:53, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

   I have tended to your comments, and done some other minor copyedits as well. You were right about the battalion/brigade issue, luckily the source was found online. Geschichte (talk) 14:23, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Passed per above. Wizardman 00:51, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for taking care of it, Wizardman. Parsecboy (talk) 12:52, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you all three for looking after the article. I am sorry I have not had the health to stop by Wikipedia at late. I will remember the italicization rules to next time :) Arsenikk ^(talk) 21:42, 23 January 2013 (UTC)