Talk:USS West Alsek/GA1

(Redirected from Talk:USS West Alsek (ID-3119)/GA1)
Latest comment: 16 years ago by Dana boomer in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

Hi! I am going to be doing the GA review for this article, and I should have the full review up within a few hours. Dana boomer (talk) 23:47, 1 September 2008 (UTC)Reply

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):   b (MoS):  
    • In the "Design and construction" section, you say " built by the Skinner & Eddy of Seattle, Washington.[1][Note 1]". Should this be "built by the Skinner & Eddy shipyard", or "built by Skinner & Eddy"?
      • I originally had "Skinner and Eddy Corpoation", hence the extra the. Now removed.
    • In the "Military career" section, you say "other surviving ships of the convoy and arrived at Verdon-sur-mer". Is there supposed be something before "and arrived"?
      • It was missing a "continued on"
    • Same section, you say "After unloading her cargo of flour and her return to the United States,". Perhaps, "cargo of flour and returning to the..."?
      • Better option. Changed.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):  
    • I see the DANFS article on the Montanan listed in the bibliography section, but not in the references section. Am I missing something?
      • Just an oversight after I went with a different source.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused):  
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:  
  6. 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):  
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  

Another well-written article! I am putting the article on hold to allow you time to deal with the few minor quibbles above. Let me know if you have any questions. Dana boomer (talk) 23:58, 1 September 2008 (UTC)Reply

Everything looks good, so I'm passing the article to GA status. Dana boomer (talk) 18:10, 2 September 2008 (UTC)Reply