Talk:Operation Mallard/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Nick-D (talk) 01:12, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments

This article is in very good shape, though I have some comments:

• "There was no fixed plan for troops arriving as part of Operation Mallard – all would depend on how well the preceding units of the 6th Airborne Division and those landing at Sword beach had done during the day" - given how heavily planned Operation Overlord was, this is quite interesting. Can you expand upon this topic? - it raises questions such as whether the drop was necessarily intended for D Day (would if have been delayed if things had gone really badly or really well?) and how the decision to allocate gliders to landing zones was made.

Added a little bit more, if all had gone well they were to expand the bridgehead southwards, presumably there were other contingency plans, but I can find nothing recorded.

• The force crossed the English channel unhindered, to arrive in Normandy at 21:00" - the tense is a bit odd here - could you say that ' The force crossed the English channel unhindered, and arrived in Normandy at 21:00'?

Changed

• The image record of File:Hamilcar Varsity.jpg says that it was taken during Operation Varsity in 1945, but this isn't reflected in the image's caption in this article

Added some text linked to varsity.Nick-D (talk) 01:30, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for doing the review.Jim Sweeney (talk) 08:06, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

No worries - that all works for me. I'd suggest a further copy edit and trying to expand the material on the planned goals for the brigade before taking this to an ACR - the British official history might have some material on this topic (tons has been written about the planning for Overlord). Nick-D (talk) 08:14, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Assessment

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   I've copy edited the article to remove problems with misplaced possessive apostrophes and commas

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. 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:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail: