Talk:Roy Inwood/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Zawed (talk · contribs) 04:58, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I will review this one over the next few days. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 04:58, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
I made a couple of minor tweaks to text in places, check you are OK with these.

"On the 25th of the month, the battalion...": suggest rephrasing to be more explicit about which month.

"...incurring about 20 per cent casualties.": not knowing the strength of the battalion or how many troops were left OOB, it may be better to express this as absolute/approximate values (as you have done elsewhere).

The paragraph beginning "The 10th Battalion suffered 207 casualties..." repeats his name quite a bit where "he" would suffice.

The wikt for mongrel should be moved to first mention.

"he was employed by the City of Adelaide": should be made clear that it was the Adelaide City Council as mentioned later

"In June 1943, Inwood was transferred...": this sentence uses transferred twice, suggest replacing the second occurrence with "posted"?

"the 10th Battalion Club decided to present the VC to the City of Adelaide" I think we could just say city here.

No dablinks
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
The lead says the VC is the "highest award for gallantry in the face of the enemy" but this isn't actually mentioned in the article body. I imagine "They Dared Mightily" will be able to support this.

Not necessary to use the "a" in Bean 1937a and 1942a

Retrieval date for Faulkner and Morgan refs? There looks to be a formatting issue with Faulkner as well, a square bracket is present.

External links check out OK
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
"No longer welcome in Broken Hill...": was Broken Hill quite a unionist/leftist town? If so, it might be worth mentioning. It seems odd to me that a VC winner would not be welcome given the status he would have had.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Image tags checked and appear OK
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Looks in good shape, minimal work required for GA status. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 23:44, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review, Zawed! All done except the "20 per cent" one; Lock doesn't give figures, and neither does Bean. I could go to the war diary if you think that's appropriate? As far as Broken Hill is concerned, it is a mining town, and in those days highly unionised. The fact that their federal member was a far-left ALP politician speaks volumes, and Inwood's comments at his welcome home wouldn't have gone down well at all. But I don't have a source for that, I'm leaving it for the reader to make the links. Do you think it needs more context? Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:13, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Scratch that, even the war diary says 20 per cent rather than a figure. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:19, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am happy with the changes/responses, have updated checklist and am passing as GA. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 07:22, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]