Jump to content

Talk:John Plagis/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]

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

Reviewer: Anotherclown (talk · contribs) 21:02, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Progression

[edit]
  • Version of the article when originally reviewed: [1]
  • Version of the article when review was closed: [2]

Technical review

[edit]

Criteria

[edit]
  • It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
    • The lead is a little repetitive. Probably no requirement to state that he won 11 victories over Malta twice in two separate paragraphs. Perhaps remove one instance?
    • Redundant language here: "After he and the squadron converted to flying Mustang IIIs, he commanded a wing of Mustangs based at RAF Bentwaters that supported bombing missions....", consider instead: "After converting to flying Mustang IIIs, he commanded a wing based at RAF Bentwaters that supported bombing missions."
    • "With Malta looking increasingly precarious...", consider instead "With the defence of Malta looking increasingly precarious..."
    • "The Luftwaffe launched a major attack against the key Maltese airfields...", consider instead "The Luftwaffe launched a major attack against key Maltese airfields..."
    • Redundant language here: "Plagis was promoted to flight lieutenant on 4 June 1942 and concurrently transferred to No. 185 Squadron to command "B" Flight." Consider removing "concurrently".
    • Further repetition in the body of the article IRT to his number of victories. "...his tally for the war was recorded as 16..." and "Plagis ended the war with a tally of 16 enemy aircraft confirmed destroyed..." Suggest removing the first instance and leaving the second.
  • It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    • All major points cited using WP:RS.
    • No issues with OR.
    • You use a short cite titled "Lucas 1981, p. 262." however there is no corresponding listing in the reference section. Could it be added?
    • Could page numbers be added for the "Charousis 2010" short citations?
  • It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    • Most major points seem to be covered without going into undue detail.
    • Level of coverage seems appropriate.
  • It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
    • No issues here.
  • It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
    • No issues here.
  • It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
    a (tagged and captioned): b (Is illustrated with appropriate images): c (non-free images have fair use rationales): d public domain pictures appropriately demonstrate why they are public domain:
    • Images are all PD and seem appropriate to the article.