Talk:Serbian State Guard/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Dank (talk · contribs) 03:11, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I'll have a look at this in the morning. - Dank (push to talk) 03:11, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

• "Higher SS and Police Leader": It's generally better to link an entire proper noun: Higher SS and Police Leader (here and also in the text)
• "As part of its role, it assisted the Germans to impose ...": Omit the first part: "It assisted the Germans in imposing ..."
• "a military government. This was due to the key rail ...": a military government, to exploit the key rail ...
• "(Serbo-Croatian: Vlada Nacionalnog Spasa, Влада Националног Спаса)": The question here is whether the reader is likely to know this is supposed to be Serbo-Croatian ... since you mention it in the lead, they probably will know (and you omit mention of the language later on), so omit "Serbo-Croatian" here.
• "five regions (oblast)": Okay, my Serbo-Croatian is a little rusty :) But isn't oblast singular? It should be plural here. Likewise for "three districts (okrug)".
• "It was royalist in sympathy, pro-Chetnik, and was rapidly infiltrated by Chetniks loyal to Draža Mihailović, did not have enough officers, and after some initial successes, was never an effective military force.": That could be clearer.
• "executing or delivering to the Germans for execution people from those groups": executing people from those groups or delivering them to the Germans for execution
• "the SDS had reduced": the SDS had been reduced, or declined
• "the 'worst troops in the world'.": double quote marks
• "the either the": either the
• Alphabetize the book references.
• I'm not the best on whether this covers "major aspects", but my understanding is that will be covered at A-class.
• The "toolbox" above reports no problems.
  • Thanks Dan. All addressed. You might like to check that my sentence structure and grammar changes are up to snuff. Thanks for the review! Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 03:11, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
    • Happy to help. Your edits check out, and I made three tweaks ... have a look. I'm going to look at a few other articles before signing off on "major aspects". - Dank (push to talk) 13:28, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
      • Copy. PRODUCER jumped in and made a couple of syntax tweaks, all edits ok with me.Peacemaker67 (send... over) 23:01, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

• Otherwise:

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:  Yes

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:  Yes

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:  Yes

   B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:  Yes

   C. No original research:  Yes

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:  Yes

   B. Focused:  Yes

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:  Yes

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:  Yes

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

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

   B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:  Yes

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail: Pass. - Dank (push to talk) 02:15, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Dan! Peacemaker67 (send... over) 02:16, 27 February 2013 (UTC)