Talk:Bell Boeing V-22 Osprey/GA1

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

Reviewer: -- &#47; MWOAP &#124; Notify Me &#92; 10:57, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

-- &#47; DeltaQuad.alt &#124; Notify Me &#92; 15:26, 2 June 2010 (UTC) (New Signature note)

To Work On list (specifics)

 * 6B: File:Osprey at Pensacola.jpg Foreign Language Content on this image, on commons.


 * 6B: File:US Navy 091019-N-2147L-001 Aviation Boatswains Mate Handler 2nd class Dustin  Shipman assigned to the amphibious transport dock ship Pre-Commissioning  Unit (PCU) New York (LPD 21), directs an MV-22 Osprey.jpg needs renaming on the commons.


 * 6B: The image with the caption "United States Marines MV-22B" needs to be changed to an appropriate caption.

Comments
Please do not change the status of the criterion, the reviewer will change that their selfs.


 * The first and third image items have been fixed or addressed. For the second item, the file name is long, but why is that really relevant here? -Fnlayson (talk) 02:08, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Good Article Criterion #7 says they have to be compliant with the Image use policy. The specific IUP that I am refering to is naming of images. -- &#47; MWOAP &#124; Notify Me &#92; 16:50, 5 May 2010 (UTC)


 * OK. I found a template for renaming the file on Commons... -Fnlayson (talk) 17:18, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
 * But nobody on Commons has renamed it yet.. -Fnlayson (talk) 01:00, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ I contacted a commons admin. Will comment more soon. -- &#47; MWOAP &#124; Notify Me &#92; 02:26, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Good deal, thanks. The image with the long name has been renamed on Commons and in this article. -Fnlayson (talk) 15:12, 24 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Are there any outstanding items now? I've done about all the improvements I can think of... -Fnlayson (talk) 20:57, 28 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Sorry for the delay, getting on it and should be done soon. -- &#47; DeltaQuad.alt &#124; Notify Me &#92; 15:26, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

There are no outstanding issues. This review needs to be completed. -Fnlayson (talk) 06:48, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Restarting review

 * I'm taking over this review, as it has stalled. At this moment I've not decided whether to use the previous review or to start from scratch. I will start by reading the article through a couple of times and then I'll make a decision - this might take most of the weekend, as I have two other review underway as well. When I've decided I will add my comments below. Pyrotec (talk) 21:50, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking this over, my normal Wikipedia duties/IRL limited this to jumps of a few min and I just didn't feel like it would be a fair review. I should have posted it here, but I was not able to finish the review as time was not availible to me, but it is on my Talkpage & the Nom's. Anyway, thanks for the takeover. -- &#47; DeltaQuad &#124; Notify Me  &#92; 00:12, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem. Pyrotec (talk) 11:27, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Initial comments
I've had a quick read through, but I've not read it all nor checked any of the references. On that basis it looks quite reasonable. I will now review the article in more depth. At this point I'm only looking for "problems", so if I find any that I can't fix myself I'll add them here. This will take a couple of so days, as I've go other reviews to deal with as well. Pyrotec (talk) 11:27, 20 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Development -
 * This section appears to be OK. Pyrotec (talk) 18:25, 21 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Design -
 * OK. Pyrotec (talk) 13:59, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Overall summary
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) 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:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) 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:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:

I'm awarding this article GA-status. It is well deserved. Pyrotec (talk) 15:47, 22 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for reviewing it! -Fnlayson (talk) 16:36, 22 June 2010 (UTC)