Talk:Diffused lighting camouflage/GA1

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

Reviewer: Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · contribs) 10:33, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Will take this one. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 10:33, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Many thanks. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:42, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Lead

 * Suggest an infobox
 * OK, which type? Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:13, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Infobox research project Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 12:28, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Done.


 * Link US Air Force, photocell
 * Done.


 * Merge single and double liners in the lead and expand to two full paras
 * Done.

Section 1

 * counterillumination -> counter-illumination; make the change everywhere, counterillumination is not a dictionary word
 * Done.


 * Midwater Squid; Is "Midwater" part of the name or just the squid swims midwater, if the latter then change it as mid-water Squid
 * Done.


 * a Canadian professor at McGill University,[3] Edmund Godfrey Burr; first mention the name, then the context
 * Done.

Section 2

 * ordinary light projectors — neither designed for robustness, nor waterproofed — on temporary; em dashes must be unspaced
 * Done.


 * Mention the ship classes
 * Done.


 * Link General Electric, New York
 * Done (two different companies!)


 * National Research Council; use the acronym
 * Done.

Section 3

 * Link St Margaret's Bay
 * Done.


 * longer-range aircraft -> long-range aircraft
 * Done.

Section 4
all good

Images

 * File:B-24J-55-CO (cropped).jpg must a RD US tag, also the date must be date of first published not the date of upload
 * Done.


 * File:HMCS Rimouski K121 MC-2853.jpg must be moved to Commons before it is used
 * No, this is not a requirement.


 * 64.1% confidence, violation possible
 * The main area of overlap is in phrases like "corvettes HMCS Edmundston and HMCS Rimouski", and in the citations, which can't be worded any other way. The text is a paraphrase not a copy.


 * Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 12:04, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * @Krishna Chaitanya Velaga: All done to date. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:14, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

References and sources

 * All the page and date ranges must have en dash in between
 * R.C. Fetherstonhaugh, R.C., 1947, pages 337-341.
 * Burr, 1947, pages 45-54.
 * Burr, 1948, pages 19-35.
 * Summary Technical Report of Division 16, NDRC. Volume 2: Visibility Studies and Some Applications in the Field of Camouflage. (Wa....pages 14-16 and 225-241
 * Done.


 * From the sources section, I see that only Burr is used. Delete all the other or move to further reading section. If moved to FR section, fix the date and page ranges in them
 * Done.
 * Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 13:37, 15 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I forgot to mention, ISBNs are required to verify the reliability of the sources.
 * Done. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:20, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * What are Burr works mentioned as sources, books or journals? They need to have reference numbers. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 15:22, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Journal papers. The Transactions are described on the Royal Society of Canada's website and at WorldCat, but there were no DOI numberings in those days; nor ISSNs, but those are in any case not necessary. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:30, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 13:44, 15 January 2017 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 02:34, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 02:34, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 02:34, 16 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Many thanks for the review. Chiswick Chap (talk) 03:16, 16 January 2017 (UTC)