Talk:Operation Python/GA1

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

Reviewer: Zawed (talk · contribs) 06:19, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Since I did the Operation Trident review, I will take this one as well. Comments to come over the following days. Zawed (talk) 06:19, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking up the review. I have taken care of the issues raised in Trident's review. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 14:00, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

I did some minor copyediting to the prose, please review these to make sure I haven't altered any meanings. Some of the copy editing changes to the Operation Trident article should have been replicated here as it would have made my review more efficient. I strongly recommend you have a look at your other articles that are still awaiting a GAR to see if feedback on already reviewed articles could be applied. In the meantime, issues I noted with this article:
 * The lead mentions that following Operation Trident, the Pakistani Navy stepped up its aerial surveillance and that Pakistani warships attempted to outsmart the Indian Navy by mingling with merchant shipping. These facts are not discussed in the body of the article.
 * Done. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 06:26, 15 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Compared to Trident, there is no information regarding the formation of the strike group for Python or indeed whether it was named. Is this information available?
 * There weren't much preparations, as mentioned small strike group was formed for the attack, no specific name was given. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 06:26, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

That's all for now. Cheers. Zawed (talk) 01:23, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Reading the article for Vinash, I see that its commander was decorated for the operation, you may as well mention it here.
 * Link Hiranandani and Simpson's rank
 * Cite 2 has an incorrect title, it should be 1971 War: The First Missile Attack on Karachi
 * Cites 4 and 8 are to the same source
 * Cite 9 isn't properly formatted, it should be similar to cite 1
 * Dupe link: Operation Trident
 * No DAB links
 * External links check out OK
 * All done. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 06:26, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * The dupe link was missed but I have fixed it. I believe this article now meets the all the GA criteria: it broadly covers the subject, is well written in a neutral tone and is appropriately cited. Passing as GA. Cheers. Zawed (talk) 08:44, 15 January 2017 (UTC)