Talk:Nigel Cullen/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Xtzou (Talk) 17:40, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I am reviewing this article. As it appears to fulfill the GA criteria, I have only a few comments.
- All fair questions, Xtzou -- from the top...!
- Early career
- "Browned off" with transport duties - what does this mean?
- Browned off is military slang for annoyed, fed up or just bored. I used it because it is a direct quote from the source, as well as apt given the military subject.
- Gladiators
- "He was "blooded"on 9 October" - what does this mean?
- Blooded means to initiate into combat -- but I've also seen the term used in competitive sport, e.g. cricket.
- Hurricanes
- "Cullen opened his account flying Hurricanes on 27 February" - is "opened his account" military terminology for something?
- Used in the military, yes, but not exclusively -- also sport (again cricket for instance) I believe -- means opened his score (of victories in this case).
- Since he flew for the RAF I am unclear why he is included in the official history of Australia in the war
- Presumably because he was Australian-born, even though he served in the RAF (a great many Australians did in WWII) and is counted as an Australian ace.
Xtzou (Talk) 17:40, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- Many tks for taking the time to review. Xtzou. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:48, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- Reply Since "Browned off", "blooded", and "opened his account" appear to fall under "jargon" (or at least, are not understood by the general English-speaking reader - of which I am one), I think the terms should either be explained or linked to an explanation in the text. Xtzou (Talk) 00:05, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
- For the first two, how about I use the Wiktionery links as I've done here? I could change the other to "opened his score" or something more obvious if you think necessary, I used "account" here because I'd said "score" a few times previously. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:10, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, I would think you would want an article about a war hero to be accessible to the general reader. The use of jargon terms makes parts of it meaningless. Best, Xtzou (Talk) 13:46, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
- Done as I proposed above. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:06, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks. A nice little article about a war here that conveys something of his personality. Xtzou (Talk) 14:59, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose quality:
Clearly and concisely written
- B. MoS compliance:
Complies with required elements of the MoS
- A. Prose quality:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
Reliable sources
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
Well referenced
- C. No original research:
- A. References to sources:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
Sets the context
- B. Focused:
Remains focused on the topic
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail: Pass!
- Pass or Fail: Pass!
Congratulations! Xtzou (Talk) 15:00, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks Xtzou! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 15:18, 29 May 2010 (UTC)