Talk:No. 77 Wing RAAF/GA1

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

Reviewer: Thurgate (talk · contribs) 18:34, 10 May 2012 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * prose:  (MoS):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * 2) 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:
 * 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) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

Comments
1. Wing headquarters. Suggest - No. 77 wing headquarters 2. Suggest you add a second column to the notes to reduce the height of that section.
 * I didn't use "No. 77 Wing" because I'd used the name in the preceding sentence. Is there another construction you could go with, like "The wing's headquarters" or "Its headquarters"?
 * Ah k, and yer your change is fine.
 * Done.

I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow you to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns. Thurgate (talk) 18:34, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Tks for reviewing! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:30, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Passed. Good job Ian. Thurgate (talk) 13:28, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:16, 11 May 2012 (UTC)