Talk:Distinguished Warfare Medal/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Retrolord (talk · contribs) 10:35, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I will review this one. ★★Retro Lord ★★ 10:35, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've done a quick review and pointed out everything I can see so far, once we deal with this there shouldnt be too much more to worry about. Thanks ! ★★Retro Lord ★★ 05:42, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing those things up! Assuming I don't find anything else, i'll pass this one later today, thanks for nominating ★★Retro Lord ★★ 23:45, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	" Navy Lieutenant Commander Nate Christensen, Pentagon spokesman " This seems a bit convoluted, do you think we could shorten this somehow? Done
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	I think the controversy section should be named differently. It incorporates both critiscm and praise for the medal, so perhaps we could change it to "reception"? As it stands, it is also slightly biased against the subject, labelling it all "controversy". Done
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	"The wreath honors the recipient's significant meritorious achievement to battlefield operations." Is this paragraph a direct quotation? If so, could you please put some quotation marks around it to show this? Done
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	PASS! Congratulations.

1a. Reworked from "Navy Lieutenant Commander Nate Christensen, Pentagon spokesman," to "Pentagon spokesman, Lieutenant Commander Nate Christensen,"
1b. Renamed as suggested to "Reception"
2b. This paragraph is in a block quote. At WP:Blockquote it says not to use quotation marks.

Thanks for undertaking this GA review. EricSerge (talk) 23:19, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]