Talk:Commissioner Government/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Adityavagarwal (talk · contribs) 15:27, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

It is an interesting article. I am glad to pick it up for a review! Would be making straight forward changes as I go, but, as always, please feel free to revert any, if I make a mistake! Adityavagarwal (talk) 15:27, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

• "included;" extra semi-colon I guess. :P

• Good pick-up, used a colon and then semi-colons.

• Perhaps the lead could be expanded a bit? Not a compulsion though, as it looks good even now. However, I just thought that we could have a bit more in the lead.

• Added a bit about German supervision.

• Perhaps give a slight idea of what these German military ranks are, in brackets? Reichsmarschall, etc.

• Added notes with footnotes, except Reichsmarschall, which was a unique rank and position.

• "the Luftwaffe transfer a training school..." would be better to name the Luftwaffe instead, as it seems ambiguous (I think it is schroder?)!

• reworded, see what you think?

• "This meeting resolved to shift to a general uprising" This should be reworded.

• added "from sabotage operations" after shift

• "administration encouraged 545 or 546 prominent" I did not quite understand the numbers... 545 or 546?

• There is a note which explains the different numbers in the sources.

• Thanks for the review, Adityavagarwal! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:05, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

• Great work with this one, Peacemaker67! Adityavagarwal (talk) 11:40, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

---

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail: