Talk:Nigel Cullen/GA1

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

Reviewer: Xtzou ( Talk ) 17:40, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I am reviewing this article. As it appears to fulfill the GA criteria, I have only a few comments.


 * All fair questions, Xtzou -- from the top...!


 * Early career
 * "Browned off" with transport duties - what does this mean?
 * Browned off is military slang for annoyed, fed up or just bored. I used it because it is a direct quote from the source, as well as apt given the military subject.


 * Gladiators
 * "He was "blooded"on 9 October" - what does this mean?
 * Blooded means to initiate into combat -- but I've also seen the term used in competitive sport, e.g. cricket.


 * Hurricanes
 * "Cullen opened his account flying Hurricanes on 27 February" - is "opened his account" military terminology for something?
 * Used in the military, yes, but not exclusively -- also sport (again cricket for instance) I believe -- means opened his score (of victories in this case).


 * Since he flew for the RAF I am unclear why he is included in the official history of Australia in the war
 * Presumably because he was Australian-born, even though he served in the RAF (a great many Australians did in WWII) and is counted as an Australian ace.

Xtzou ( Talk ) 17:40, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Many tks for taking the time to review. Xtzou. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:48, 28 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Reply Since "Browned off", "blooded", and "opened his account" appear to fall under "jargon" (or at least, are not understood by the general English-speaking reader - of which I am one), I think the terms should either be explained or linked to an explanation in the text. Xtzou ( Talk ) 00:05, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * For the first two, how about I use the Wiktionery links as I've done here? I could change the other to "opened his score" or something more obvious if you think necessary, I used "account" here because I'd said "score" a few times previously. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:10, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, I would think you would want an article about a war hero to be accessible to the general reader. The use of jargon terms makes parts of it meaningless. Best, Xtzou ( Talk ) 13:46, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Done as I proposed above. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:06, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. A nice little article about a war here that conveys something of his personality. Xtzou ( Talk ) 14:59, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

 GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Congratulations! Xtzou ( Talk ) 15:00, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality: Clearly and concisely  written
 * B. MoS compliance: Complies with required elements of the  MoS
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources: Reliable sources
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary: Well referenced
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects: Sets the context
 * B. Focused: Remains focused on the topic
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail: Pass!
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail: Pass!
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail: Pass!
 * Pass or Fail: Pass!
 * Thanks Xtzou! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 15:18, 29 May 2010 (UTC)