Talk:1940 Brocklesby mid-air collision/GA1

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

Reviewer: Bernstein2291 (Talk • Contributions • Sign Here) 17:28, 5 March 2011 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * Most of your prose is good, but the lede has odd sentence construction. I suggest reading some ledes in other articles and write yours somewhat like those
 * Thanks for reviewing. Could you be a little more specific on this point? Having written doezens of FAs and GAs I've tried to write this lead in similar manner but perhaps there's something I'm missing... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:08, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't usually see opening sentences that put the date last. Also on the third sentence you should get rid of the "to be" before "followed". Besides that It looks fine. Bernstein2291 (Talk • Contributions • Sign Here) 04:28, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah, thanks -- yep, fair enough, changed those. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:21, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Great. I think it can pass now. Bernstein2291 (Talk • Contributions • Sign Here) 16:26, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * I'm going to hold this article for now until the lede gets fixed.
 * It can pass now.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * I'm going to hold this article for now until the lede gets fixed.
 * It can pass now.
 * It can pass now.