Talk:Gail Halvorsen/GA1

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

Reviewer: Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs) 23:00, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria Pretty good and a worthy subject. A few fixes required.
 * 1) Is it well written?
 * A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
 * B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
 * See below
 * 1) Is it verifiable with no original research?
 * A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
 * B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons&mdash;science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
 * C. It contains no original research:
 * D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
 * B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * 1) Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * All images are appropriately licenced
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * 1) Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * All images are appropriately licenced
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:

Placing review on hold. Hawkeye7 (talk) 23:00, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Date formats - DMY used in the infobox and some footnotes, MDY in the article. Suggest standardising on DMY ✅
 * Citations needed for the first paragraphs of "Professional career" and "Legacy", and there is a "citation needed" tag in "Humanitarian work". ✅
 * Spelling errors:
 * "resuable" -> "reuseable"
 * "the at the Directorate of Space and Technology" -> "at the Directorate of Space and Technology" ✅
 * "food,but" -> "food, but" ✅
 * "The kids broke it into little pieces and shared it; The ones who did not get any sniffed the wrappers" -> " The kids broke it into little pieces and shared it; the ones who did not get any sniffed the wrappers"  ✅
 * "Upon his return home, Halvorsen met with several individuals who were key in making Operation "Little Vittles" a success" err...
 * "but"drew him two proposals"     space after "but" ✅
 * "nations.In" -> "nations. In" ✅
 * "Colonel Halvorsen" -> "Halvorsen" ✅
 * Links
 * Link Salt Lake City, Utah, Rigby, Idaho, Garland, Utah, Spanish Fork, Utah, United States Army Air Corps, Civil Air Patrol, C-54, William H. Tunner, Lucius D. Clay, Wright Air Development Center, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Hill Air Force Base, Air Command and Staff College, Maxwell AFB, Air Force Systems Command, Titan III, Brigham Young University, Utah State Agricultural College, Order of Merit of the Federal Republic of Germany ✅


 * Hi Hawkeye7, unfortunately Alexis has taken ill. Amgisseman can take a look at this nomination tomorrow though. I understand the prose problems, but I'm not sure what the problem is with the references. I did notice that one of them had a dead link in it; is that the issue? They all use citation templates, do they just need more of the fields filled out? Thanks for taking the time to review this nomination. Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 21:21, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * What is holding up the nomination is not the prose, but the lack of citations for the statements in the first paragraphs of Professional career ("Halvorsen would serve as part of Air Force Systems Command for the next four years"), Legacy (" After his official retirement in 1974, Halvorsen continued to serve the local, national, and international community in a variety of ways"), and Humanitarian work sections ("Halvorsen also performed multiple candy drops throughout the United States"). These are marked with "citation needed" tags. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:12, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Hawkeye7 On Alexis's behalf, I went in and added citations or new sources to that information in the article. Thanks! Amgisseman(BYU) (talk) 19:11, 22 July 2016 (UTC)