Talk:Les Clisby/GA1

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

Reviewer: Canadian   Paul  03:32, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I will be reviewing this article in the near future, most likely tomorrow. Canadian  Paul  03:32, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

And here it is!


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 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, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

A very nice article, one of the best I've seen in the drive. Just two comments:
 * 1) Notes #4 and #12 don't work for me... although I can't tell if that's a problem on my end. Please check them to see if they come up blank for you to.
 * 2) Under "World War II", third paragraph (not counting the citation) - Described as being "extrovert, profane, perpetually cheerful and addicted to flying", Clisby also had "premature lines" on his face. - These direct quotes require a direct citation, particularly as the next time references pop up, there are two of them, and thus the source for these quotes cannot be immediately discerned.

To allow for these changes to be made I am placing the article on hold for a period of up to a week. I'm always open to discussion on any of the items, so if you think I'm wrong on something leave your thoughts here and we'll discuss. I'll be checking this page at least daily, unless something comes up, so you can be sure I'll notice any comments left here. Canadian  Paul  02:08, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking the time to review, Paul -- those two things should be fixed now. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 04:41, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Well you made the review easy and pleasurable! Small issues now fixed, so this article definitely meets the GA criteria - thus I will be passing it as such. Congratulations and thank you for your hard work! Canadian   Paul  05:43, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Tks again -- nice to get an Australian-themed MilHist article listed for GA on Anzac Day...! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:46, 25 April 2010 (UTC)