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

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Anotherclown (talk · contribs) 08:34, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Progression

 * Version of the article when originally reviewed:
 * Version of the article when review was closed:

Technical review

 * Citations: The Citation Check tool reveals no errors (no action required).
 * Disambiguations: no dab links (no action required).
 * Linkrot: External links check out (no action required).
 * Alt text: images lack alt text so you might consider adding it (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 undefined undefined 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)