Talk:Emu War/GA1

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

This article was subject to an edit war on 4 December 2009, but the page has not been edited since 11 December. I will undertake a more thorough review. Reviewer: Cnilep (talk) 21:04, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * Prose is slightly confusing and not explicit enough on all points. For example, the article does not explain that emus are large flightless birds, or that Lewis Guns are automatic machine guns. In addition, some of the prose closely paraphrases sources (esp. Robin et al. 2009) and might be rewritten or else quoted directly.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Suggestions that the name "Emu War" was adopted by the media to satirize the affair seem to be conclusions based on the use of scare quotes in a single source.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * I would like to see more coverage of the drought of 1932 in Western Australia.
 * 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):
 * Are there appropriate images of the event? If not, add free image of emu.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * I have numerous minor concerns, listed above. They may be met relatively quickly. I trust that the edit war will not flare up again.
 * UPDATE 21:52, 10 January 2010 (UTC) Page is reasonably well-written and reasonably well sourced. However, the page is not entirely stable, having suffered an edit war in December and needing consensus on a couple of questions this week. (See Talk:Emu War and edits of 9 January 2010.) There is currently no photo. Some prose is a close paraphrase of sources.
 * I have numerous minor concerns, listed above. They may be met relatively quickly. I trust that the edit war will not flare up again.
 * UPDATE 21:52, 10 January 2010 (UTC) Page is reasonably well-written and reasonably well sourced. However, the page is not entirely stable, having suffered an edit war in December and needing consensus on a couple of questions this week. (See Talk:Emu War and edits of 9 January 2010.) There is currently no photo. Some prose is a close paraphrase of sources.

There are various images of emus at Dromaius novaehollandiae. Cnilep (talk) 22:33, 3 January 2010 (UTC)