![]() | Operation Goodwood (naval) is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 22, 2019. | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
![]() | This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Ian Rose ( talk · contribs) 12:24, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi Nick, good to catch up here at GAN again -- will try to look this over during the week and post a review by the w/e at least. Cheers,
Ian Rose (
talk)
12:24, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Toolbox checks
Structure -- Looks straightforward/logical.
Prose/detail
Since I've come to the end of the w/e without completing the review, just a note that I've read and copyedited to the end of Opposing Forces and the above is what I have so far, more later. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 13:50, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
Referencing -- Sources look reliable and citations/works appear suitably formatted.
Images -- All appear licensed appropriately.
Looks really good Nick, a worthy addition to your series on the FAA's abortive attempts on Tirpitz -- just let me know about that last prose point or if you have any probs with the copyediting... Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 14:17, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
![]() | Operation Goodwood (naval) is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 22, 2019. | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
![]() | This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Ian Rose ( talk · contribs) 12:24, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi Nick, good to catch up here at GAN again -- will try to look this over during the week and post a review by the w/e at least. Cheers,
Ian Rose (
talk)
12:24, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Toolbox checks
Structure -- Looks straightforward/logical.
Prose/detail
Since I've come to the end of the w/e without completing the review, just a note that I've read and copyedited to the end of Opposing Forces and the above is what I have so far, more later. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 13:50, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
Referencing -- Sources look reliable and citations/works appear suitably formatted.
Images -- All appear licensed appropriately.
Looks really good Nick, a worthy addition to your series on the FAA's abortive attempts on Tirpitz -- just let me know about that last prose point or if you have any probs with the copyediting... Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 14:17, 16 July 2014 (UTC)