Talk:Bomber Mafia/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Wilhelmina Will (talk · contribs) 23:36, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well-written:

I made a few minor adjustments to the wording here and there, after which I believe that all prose, grammar, list-incorporation, and layout MOS policies are followed accordingly. Like my singing? Ha-la-la-la-la-la-LA-LAAA!!! (talk) 08:23, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct

(b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation

Verifiable with no original research:

The article uses many reputable third-party sources, and makes frequent inline citations to them. I've detected no OR violations anywhere. Like my singing? Ha-la-la-la-la-la-LA-LAAA!!! (talk) 08:23, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline

(b) 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)

(c) it contains no original research

Broad in its coverage:

With an appropriate and non-excessive quantity of coverage on a variety of key aspects to the topic, I feel that the coverage provided by the aarticle is complete enough to satisfy this GA criterium. Like my singing? Ha-la-la-la-la-la-LA-LAAA!!! (talk) 08:23, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style)

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

The article is neither biased towards nor against its subject, in any way. Like my singing? Ha-la-la-la-la-la-LA-LAAA!!! (talk) 08:23, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

No edit warring has happened on the article for at least three years. Like my singing? Ha-la-la-la-la-la-LA-LAAA!!! (talk) 23:58, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

All three images used in the article are public domain, and thus cannot violate fair use policies. Each one has a valid license provided, and serves a useful purpose in illustrating the article. Like my singing? Ha-la-la-la-la-la-LA-LAAA!!! (talk) 07:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content

(b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions

Any changes/fixes/alterations that you recommended? Binksternet (talk) 17:21, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, no need to worry about that, Binksternet. I am pleased to announce that my review of this article's GA candidacy has brought back satisfactory results. It will be my honour to add Bomber Mafia to the list of War and military GAs. Congratulations! Like my singing? Ha-la-la-la-la-la-LA-LAAA!!! (talk) 08:25, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yay! Thanks for the review! Binksternet (talk) 15:24, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]