Talk:Red team/GA1

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

Reviewer: FormalDude (talk · contribs) 10:01, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

(Criteria marked are unassessed)
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):
 * All good.
 * b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * MOS compliant.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a. (reference section):
 * Passes spot checks.
 * b. (citations to reliable sources):
 * All in-line citations are from reliable sources.
 * c. (OR):
 * Passes spot checks.
 * d. (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * Found no copied or closely paraphrased text in the article.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a. (major aspects):
 * Addresses the main aspects of the topic.
 * b. (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * No NPOV concerns.
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * Do not see any changing significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):
 * One copyvio found, since removed.
 * b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * Appropriate and relevant.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/fail: ✅
 * Meets all 6 criteria, happy to pass. Thanks for your work ! –– Formal Dude  (talk)  14:55, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * Do not see any changing significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):
 * One copyvio found, since removed.
 * b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * Appropriate and relevant.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/fail: ✅
 * Meets all 6 criteria, happy to pass. Thanks for your work ! –– Formal Dude  (talk)  14:55, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/fail: ✅
 * Meets all 6 criteria, happy to pass. Thanks for your work ! –– Formal Dude  (talk)  14:55, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

Comments
Starting the review soon. I will make comments here and update the progress above as we go. –– Formal Dude  (talk)  10:01, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Change who are responsible for defending networks and computers at an organization against attack → who are responsible for defending an organization's networks and computers at against attack
 * Not sure if the "types" section heading is needed.
 * wikilink digital security to Computer security
 * In fact, a role of the red team is to increase the skills of the blue team – Remove "In fact"
 * Red teams will typically have very good graph databases of their own organization – Replace "typically" with "usually" or a similar synonym to avoid repetition from the previous sentence.
 * I am of the opinion there are too many images of 9/11 in Wikipedia articles that only tangentially relate to the event.
 * Remove File:Medium Rucksack.jpg as a copyvio.
 * . Sorry about that. The image had been on Commons for over a decade and was also verified by Flicker Bot, so I assumed it was okay. – Novem Linguae (talk) 10:59, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
 * It can sometimes be worthwhile to engage in "active defense" – why?
 * Unlike cybersecurity, which typically has many layers of security – reword to remove starting sentences consecutively with "Unlike cybersecurity"
 * A single vehicle rather than a convoy of vehicles, and a vehicle with exterior lights turned off, is less conspicuous. The use of red lights, for example red flashlights, can help reduce the visibility of lights. – missing inline citation and is a bit too close to WP:NOTHOWTO.
 * Red teaming is sometimes utilized by organizations outside the United States – Only sometimes? Is it not common outside the U.S.?
 * Overall seems to lack representation of a worldwide view of the subject. I'd like to see more countries covered if at all possible.
 * To address these two bullets, I added information about the TIBER-EU framework, Israel's Ipcha Mistabra, and NATO. Please let me know if more non-United States examples are needed. – Novem Linguae (talk) 10:38, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
 * For example, command-line interface (CLI) – duplicate wl and second appearance so it can use just the abbreviation.
 * tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) will be used – duplicate wl and second appearance so it can use just the abbreviation.
 * The United States Department of Defense (DoD) – duplicate wl and second appearance so it can use just the abbreviation.
 * Remove the following duplicate wikilinks: groupthink, board game, September 11 attacks, Central Intelligence Agency, Red Cell, United States Army, blue team, social engineering, Bluetooth, Transportation Security Administration, OPFOR.