Talk:Rumsfeld Commission/GA1

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

Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:13, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Projects and major contributors have been notified. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:46, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

 * GA review (see here for criteria)

#:: I feel that the lead should be expanded somewhat to fully summarise the article as per WP:LEAD #:: One dead link (ref #21 ) has been tagged.
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * Well written, I made some copy-edits to satisfy these requirements.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * One statement: North Korea launched their Taepodong-1, modeled on the Scud missile highlighted in the report, on August 31 in what they described as a satellite launch. However, US intelligence determined the attempt was a failure. needs a citation.
 * It would be helpful to have an EL to the actual report, which I assume is available on-line, this is not a GA requirement however.
 * I assume good faith for off-line sources.
 * Other references check out and are WP:RS
 * 1) 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):
 * OK
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * :On hold for seven days for above issues to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:34, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, just the lead to be addressed, as per above. Jezhotwells (talk) 02:05, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, keep GA status, thanks for the hard work that has gone into this. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:02, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * :On hold for seven days for above issues to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:34, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, just the lead to be addressed, as per above. Jezhotwells (talk) 02:05, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, keep GA status, thanks for the hard work that has gone into this. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:02, 31 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the constructive critique! I'm sorry not to have kept this more updated since it was created. So far I believe I addressed many of the major things you noted; over the coming days I'll see what more can be done (will add cite templates all around), and I'll try to get a hold of the main book source to see if I missed anything from first round. Joshdboz (talk) 00:07, 25 January 2010 (UTC)