Talk:Australia in the Allied intervention in the Russian Civil War/GA1
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
I'll be reviewing this article shortly. Ealdgyth - Talk 00:15, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
b (MoS):
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars etc.:
- No edit wars etc.:
- 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):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
Specific Concerns
- Not enough to hold GA status back, but the first sentence in the lead, is it really necessary to specify Russia in "...assumed power in Russia..."?
- Third sentence of the lead is awkward, suggest "During the war a number of foreign armies, including the Western allies, also took part. Most of these foreign troops fought against the Red Army, whilst individual foreign volunteers fought on both sides."
- If you go on to FAC, you'll need a citation for the first paragraph of Context.
- You need a citation for the last parts of the second paragraph of Context.
- First sentence of the first paragraph of Australian involvement is awkward, might consider rewording.
- None of these glitches are enough to keep the article from GA status, and I'll be promoting it after I post this. Ealdgyth - Talk 00:51, 16 February 2009 (UTC)