Talk:Operation Colossus/GA1

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Based on the Good Article criteria:

Well-written

The lead should probably have some transition between the first sentence and the rest of the paragraph. Currently, the first sentence describes the operation but then the paragraph directly goes into the background. The relationship isn't obvious, so there should be some kind of connection established (as a bad example: "The raid was made possible by the establishment of the British airborne formation in June 1940").
The German military pioneered the use of airborne formations... -> This should probably be re-written as "one of the pioneers of the use of airborne formations", given that the Soviet Union was ahead of them in certain ways.
The Allied governments were aware of the success of these operations and decided to form their own airborne formations. -> Sounds sort of strange; you'd think they be aware, since they were defeated. Perhaps something along the lines of "Impressed by the success of German airborne operations..." would sound more accurate.
I eliminated some redundant and unclear words; I would look through the article and make sure these are removed. This is more important in case you decide to take the article to FAC, though.
Was this the first airborne operation for the British? Then the background would make more sense, otherwise it just seems like it's out of scope (although, I'm assuming this is the first, since there is no description of any other airborne raids). If it is, it should probably be mentioned somewhere early.
In the future, dashes separating thoughts in articles should be em dashes (search em dash on Wikipedia and it will take you to the MoS guidelines page for dashes).
I tried to convert all the measurements I could find; anything I didn't do should be done, as well.

Factually accurate

Passes

Broad in coverage

Passes

Neutrality and Stability

Passes on both accounts

Illustrated

File:Tatton park memorial.JPG and File:No2commando.jpg should be given description boxes.

JonCatalán^(Talk) 19:13, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Righto, I've done everything you've highlighted, although you should look it over again to make sure it's okay to your satisfaction. Replaced the user tag for No2commando with a PD-BritishGov tag as I believe it's PD, and the other photo is just a normal photo of a memorial - I don't think it needs any other tags or licensing. I might be wrong though. Skinny87 (talk) 11:04, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]