Talk:Operation Royal Flush/GA1

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

Reviewer: Zawed (talk · contribs) 08:14, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

I'll do this one, comments to follow shortly. Zawed (talk) 08:14, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

That's it for now. I'll check back in a few days. Zawed (talk) 08:53, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
 * The lead seems a bit long given relative size of the article, could be trimmed a little. I also think, for sake of flow, the 3rd sentence of the 2nd para should be moved to follow the 2nd sentence of the 1st para. You also use the term Abwehr in the lead but not the article itself.
 * Second para of background section: "Operation Fortitude North". North should be made part of the link.
 * London Controlling Section is linked twice.
 * In the article body, the link for Operation Zeppelin needs to be moved to its first mention.
 * Operation: link Normandy Landings
 * Operation: "...Allies' interest in the Balkans region..." I suggest deleting region here as it is used again in the same sentence later on.
 * Bibliography: Latimer is not in alphabetical order, and there are two colons in place of publication. Holt also needs place of publication.
 * Operation: link Normandy Landings
 * Operation: "...Allies' interest in the Balkans region..." I suggest deleting region here as it is used again in the same sentence later on.
 * Bibliography: Latimer is not in alphabetical order, and there are two colons in place of publication. Holt also needs place of publication.
 * Bibliography: Latimer is not in alphabetical order, and there are two colons in place of publication. Holt also needs place of publication.
 * Bibliography: Latimer is not in alphabetical order, and there are two colons in place of publication. Holt also needs place of publication.
 * ErrantX, pinging you as the GA Bot doesn't seem to have left its standard notification message of the review on your talk page. Zawed (talk) 05:26, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Awesome! Thanks for the ping. I will look through this later tonight when I've got some time :) --Errant (chat!) 13:46, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
 * okay done the lead as well :) see what you think! Thanks for the review. --Errant (chat!) 18:30, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
 * looks good, passing as GA. Zawed (talk) 09:10, 27 January 2016 (UTC)