Talk:Aloha from Hawaii via Satellite/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Sammi Brie (talk · contribs) 03:35, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

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

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   This article has multiple areas where a copy edit is warranted and was nominated with several typos and capitalization issues present. From what I'm reading, one of the policies that might be of most use to you is MOS:NUMERAL, e.g. "charted at forty-three" probably should be "charted at 43". There are some extraneous commas and one or two sentences with too many ", and" setups. Take another look, or perhaps send it to WP:GOCE.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

   Lots of good offline and newspapers.com citations with a nice citation density. Personal suggestion: make sure to get page numbers from the newspaper, which often vary from what newspapers.com provides, especially for papers that use lettered or numbered sections. Earwig throws up a content farm's repost of this and a couple common phrases and story titles, with the highest legitimate entry at just 13 percent similarity.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   While I have issues with the prose quality, the article covers all the things it needs to and does it well.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   GDuwen has been the only substantial editor since beginning the major expansion in December.

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   The primary blocker here is a copy edit, and it's definitely needed. I am placing the nomination on hold, to be resumed after a copy edit by WP:GOCE. The article needs it before I can promote. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 05:21, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

@Sammi Brie: Thanks for taking up the review. I placed the article on the request section of the Guild. I'll ping you whenever they happen to work on it (there are a bunch of articles at the time in the queue).--GDuwenHoller! 19:04, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Sounds good, thanks for letting me know. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 19:06, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Sammi Brie Just checking-in to let you know that I'm still tracking the progress of the article on the GOCE list. It is currently nicely placed on the request queue, so I think we'll be hopefully able to continue the process soon enough.--GDuwenHoller! 22:12, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

@Sammi Brie: After the wondeful job by Twofingered Typist, we are now able to continue with the nomination.--GDuwenHoller! 21:35, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

@GDuwen: Thank you for waiting. I caught a few other things that were missed, but I am good to pass this GA now. Thanks for your patience. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 22:08, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing. It took a little longer than usual, but it was worth it.--GDuwenHoller! 18:52, 9 March 2021 (UTC)