GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: MyCatIsAChonk ( talk · contribs) 23:01, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
I'll start my review now!
MyCatIsAChonk (
talk)
23:01, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
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. |
Everything looks good now. | |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. |
Everything has been fixed. | |
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. |
All good now. | |
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). | Citations are all good; quotations are properly cited and there are no bare URLs. | |
2c. it contains no original research. | No original research visible; statements/claims are cited. | |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | Earwig shows no copyvios or plagiarism.
| |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | Article follows the inclusion standards in WikiProject Aviation. | |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). |
All good now, content is focused. | |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | No visible bias within the article. | |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | No edit wars or disputes. | |
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. | Media is correctly tagged; fair use image at the top (the airport's logo) has correct non-free use rationale. | |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | Images are relevant and captioned appropriatly; some were a bit small, but I slightly increased them to make them more visible. | |
7. Overall assessment. | After many changes, it's finally all set. See the discussion above for my final thoughts. Thanks! |
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: MyCatIsAChonk ( talk · contribs) 23:01, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
I'll start my review now!
MyCatIsAChonk (
talk)
23:01, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
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. |
Everything looks good now. | |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. |
Everything has been fixed. | |
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. |
All good now. | |
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). | Citations are all good; quotations are properly cited and there are no bare URLs. | |
2c. it contains no original research. | No original research visible; statements/claims are cited. | |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | Earwig shows no copyvios or plagiarism.
| |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | Article follows the inclusion standards in WikiProject Aviation. | |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). |
All good now, content is focused. | |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | No visible bias within the article. | |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | No edit wars or disputes. | |
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. | Media is correctly tagged; fair use image at the top (the airport's logo) has correct non-free use rationale. | |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | Images are relevant and captioned appropriatly; some were a bit small, but I slightly increased them to make them more visible. | |
7. Overall assessment. | After many changes, it's finally all set. See the discussion above for my final thoughts. Thanks! |