Wikipedia

Talk:Star Air Service/GA1

< Talk:Star Air Service
Latest comment: 15 years ago by Arsenikk in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

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

Some general comments. Some of these may not be strictly GA criteria, but it is just as good to get it right sooner than later (for instance if you ever wanted to get this or another article to featured status).

  • The sentences are a bit too long. This is difficult to see oneself, but I would really like to see some more places to breath in there.
  • When writing a City, State, remember to always put a comma (or a period) after the state.
  • Use a ' not a ’ for genitive s. Similarly use "" not “”.
  • In general, references go at the end of a sentence, or at a fragment, unless it is ambiguous to understanding what is being referenced where. References a the end of sentences tend to be "invisible", but in the middle they break up the readers reading.
  • There should be more use of commas. In particular, there seem to be problems with forgetting to end optional sections with a comma, for instance: Kenneth W. "Kenny" Neese, one of the Star pilots, took over management of the company,
  • Titles are only capitalized if there is one in the world, or if they are directly in front of the name. For instance, Steve Mills was chief pilot; but Chief Pilot Steve Mills.
  • Either use 'November 27, 1937' or '27 November 1937'. Northing else is allowed in prose format on Wikipedia.
  • It is uncommon to link countries. Continents are practically never linked (unless vital to the article).
  • If a date is in the middle of a sentence, add a comma behind it: December 8, 1942,...
  • There is no apostrophe in decades (1920s, not 1920's).
  • Never use all-caps, even when sourcing. All-caps is a typographical choice (such as boldface or choice of font).

More specific comments:

  • The lead needs to be probably four times the length, and summarize the whole article.
  • All the events under the section on Seattle are without dates, or even year.
  • Further reading comes after bibliography
  • To give consistency, but internally and in the whole project, and to ease extraction of metadata, I recommend using {{cite book}} for sourcing books.
  • Ideally, there should be no external links. Only links that supplement the article (not repeating them) and are not listed as sources should be listed. Once an article about a company has reached GA status, it normally does not have any external links.
  • Again, try to minimize and at best avoid 'see also' sections. In this instance, all four links should be in the text. If they are there, they should not be in the 'see also' section. They should also be so self-explanatory that a reader understand why they are there, without reading the article.
  • Avoid 'sandwiching' images, by placing them right and left at the same place on the screen (sandwiching the text in between)
  • Wikipedia is not a directory. A full list of pilots (beyond those notable enough to mention in the prose) is a directory-like listing. This should be removed.
  • As for the list of aircraft, this is encyclopedic, but only if listed by type. Create a list, and state the quantity of each craft. For instance, six Bellanca CH-300 Pacemaker. If you really want to, you can incorporate the registration and serial numbers into the table, but I think some poeple would frown on that. There is no shame in writing a short article on a short-lived company during the 1930s and 1940s, if all the available sources have been exhausted.

Once these things have been seen to, I will have a look again and make sure I have not overlooked something important. Otherwise, good work, interesting article about the dawn of aviation in a remote (and thereby in my opinion interesting) location. Do not hesitate to ask if you have questions regarding the review, article or other aviation-related stuff. Happy editing. Arsenikk (talk) 12:13, 15 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

I hope you're reading this page, cus it isn't transcribing properly on the main talk page. Anyway, the article has been on hold for three weeks now, and there are still issues. I retain my stand that a list of pilots is non-encyclopedic, and the paragraph before the list is not neutral—it contains many weasel words and opinions that although they may not be false, are not facts or simply vague. I also think they were cool people who had a tough life and served an important job in Alaska, but that doesn't make that a fact, just an opinion. Again, the list itself is too detailed, even if it is true. The list of aircraft needs to be converted to a table (see Help:Table). Right now it is very difficult to read and contains redundant information. It has been established in several talk pages (sorry, I don't have links) that registration numbers and serial numbers of aircraft are not encyclopedic, but that quantity of each model is. Otherwise, I would ask you to "thin down" the external links. Otherwise, the article should be good to pass. If work is not done very soon, I will fail the article. You will of course be free to re-nominate, but then a new reviewer will come along and probably find other "faults" with the article ;) Arsenikk (talk) 13:06, 5 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Automated Peer Review

edit

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Smallman12q (talk) 19:56, 12 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Star_Air_Service/GA1&oldid=1084082802"