Talk:History of the Rhodesian Light Infantry (1972–1977)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Anotherclown (talk • contribs) 08:56, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Progression

 * Version of the article when originally reviewed:
 * Version of the article when review was closed:

Technical review

 * Citations: The Citation Check tool reveals several errors:
 * (Multiple references contain the same content)
 * smith199210 (Multiple references are using the same name)
 * Disambiguations: one dab link :
 * Territorial Army
 * Linkrot: External links check out (no action required).
 * Alt text: some images lack alt text so you might consider adding it for consistency (suggestion only).
 * Copyright violations: The Earwig Tool is currently not working, however spot checks using Google reveal no issues (no action required).


 * All fixed. —Cliftonianthe orangey bit 09:19, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Criteria

 * It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * The conflict winds up again
 * "...then an RLI Lieutenant...", should be "...then an RLI lieutenant..." per WP:MilTerms.
 * Chimurenga: the Bush War begins in earnest
 * "...and de Borchgrave was wary of a possible ambush of his car should he drive out...", perhaps more simply: "...and de Borchgrave was wary of being ambushed should he drive his car out..." (suggestion only).
 * Repeated linking of SAS here: "Second Lieutenant Ian Buttenshaw was despatched to Centenary the next day along with a troop of SAS, led by Bert Sachse." Already linked in previous section, so this should be removed per WP:OVERLINK.
 * This sentence seems a little clumsy to me: "The effectiveness of ZANLA's adopted Maoist tactics was demonstrated by the maintained element of surprise in the attack and by the ability the cadres now had to melt seamlessly into the local population between strikes." In particular "...by the maintained element of surprise..." Perhaps consider rewording?
 * I think this sentence might be missing some commas: "The Rhodesian government and security forces were surprised and confused by these developments, and by the fact that they now with increasing regularity found dirt roads in the country's north-east rigged with ZANLA land mines." Perhaps: "The Rhodesian government and security forces were surprised and confused by these developments, and by the fact that they now, with increasing regularity, found dirt roads in the country's north-east rigged with ZANLA land mines."
 * "...the new ZANLA doctrines...", would this work better as "...the new ZANLA tactics..."
 * Typo here "After their lax in concentration the security forces...", should be "After their lapse in concentration the security forces..."
 * Missing word here: "...so it was difficult for the Rhodesians fight them face-to-face." Consider "so it was difficult for the Rhodesians to fight them face-to-face."
 * "...the doubling of National Service length from six to 12...", might work better as "...the doubling of the length of National Service from six to 12..."
 * Political complications overseas affect the conflict
 * "The men stood in line as Lieutenant-Colonel Parker reviewed the troops...", this should just be "The men stood in line as Parker reviewed the troops...", removing rank at second instance following formal introduction per WP:SURNAME.
 * Typo here "...the black nationalist leaders were loath to attend a conference on ground they they perceived as not neutral...", specifically "they they".
 * Missing word here: "Vorster and Kaunda arrived and sat the Rhodesian side...", perhaps: "Vorster and Kaunda arrived and sat on the Rhodesian side."
 * this is a little repetitive: "...the right to return to Rhodesia right away...", perhaps reword?
 * More failed attempts for resolution
 * Is there a missing word here: "...the end of the two-year interim...", perhaps "...the end of the two-year interim period..."?
 * This seeems incorrect: "Da Costa proved the battle's only Rhodesian casualty." According the previous sentences... "RLI Rifleman Grobler was lightly wounded and evacuated to Ruda, as were two privates of the RAR, Philip Chagwiza and Chikoto Saxon, who were both hit by small arms fire from the ground while still in the helicopters." Perhaps you mean: "Da Costa proved the battle's only Rhodesian fatality..."?
 * "Captain Donald was widely applauded...", this should be "Donald was widely applauded...", rm rank at second instace following formal introduction per WP:SURNAME.
 * Notes and references
 * "...when he accepted a commission and was promoted to Captain...", this should be "...when he accepted a commission and was promoted to captain...", per WP:MilTerms.


 * It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Excellent us of WP:RS, with all major points cited.
 * Consistent citation style used throughout.
 * Citation # 21 lacks a page number - is it available?
 * No issues with OR.


 * It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Article is comprehensive and appears to cover all major aspects.


 * It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
 * No issues here, the opinions of participants are all referenced and presented fairly.


 * It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * Sigificant recent work, however it all appears to be constructive.
 * It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
 * a (tagged and captioned): b (Is illustrated with appropriate images):  c (non-free images have fair use rationales):  d public domain pictures appropriately demonstrate why they are public domain:
 * Images all appear to be PD or licenced and seem appropriate for the article.
 * Excellent use of captions, which are supported by citations.
 * The maps are of high quality and illustrate the text well.
 * Alt text has now been added is of a high quality.


 * Overall:
 * a Pass/Fail:
 * Another fine article in my opinion. Just some minor prose and MOS points above to deal with / discuss. Am happy of course to review any points you disagree with. Anotherclown (talk) 20:47, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I've made all the alterations you suggested. A minor point is the Lockley reference (from the Lion & Tusk), for which I do not have a page number but it is available online at the Rhodesian Army Association's website. I have linked it in the citation. Apart from that, I think it looks okay now. —Cliftonianthe orangey bit 07:52, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Too easy, passing review now. Good work. Anotherclown (talk) 21:49, 26 November 2011 (UTC)