Talk:Robert A. Little/GA1
GA Review[edit]
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
I'm hoping to go through the article more thoroughly quite soon; initial reaction is that it has all the right characteristics.
Reviewer: Scoop100 (talk) 13:39, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hmm, you forgot to put yourself down as the reviewer on the WP:GAN page, but I'll drive on regardless.
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose quality:
- B. MoS compliance:
- A. Prose quality:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. References to sources:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- Clarification or a link about the RNAS rank structure might be in order; I was surprised that a Flight commander was only equivalent to a RAF captain, which also probably ought to be linked.
- I considered links for the RNAS ranks but it's not a simple matter. WP offers little clear assistance in its RNAS article or RAF rank structure article (there's no RNAS rank structure article), and even interpreting things 'logically' leads to contradictions. For instance we could link the RNAS' Flight Sub-Lieutenant to the Navy's Sub-Lieutenant and the RNAS Flight Lieutenant to Lieutenant#Naval rank, but we then hit a snag with the RNAS Flight Commander and Squadron Commander possibly both being equivalent to Lieutenant Commander, since there's also Wing Commander and Wing Captain in the RNAS, which presumably equate to Commander and Captain (naval). Then again, we could link the RNAS Flight Lieutenant to the modern air force Flight Lieutenant but, again, where does that put Flight Commander with regard to the modern air force ranks, since the RNAS Squadron Commander presumably equates to the air force Squadron Leader? Little was a Flight Commander in the RNAS and became a Captain (land) in the RAF, but in the modern air force a Flight Lieutenant is equivalent to a Captain... We can make reasonable assumptions but I don't know any reliable source that gives a definitive answer so the links will be open to question. Probably worth discussing but it goes beyond the scope of this particular article. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:10, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
- I was afraid of that, but I agree that would be outside the scope of this article unless there was a handy page on RNAS ranks to link to.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:49, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
- I considered links for the RNAS ranks but it's not a simple matter. WP offers little clear assistance in its RNAS article or RAF rank structure article (there's no RNAS rank structure article), and even interpreting things 'logically' leads to contradictions. For instance we could link the RNAS' Flight Sub-Lieutenant to the Navy's Sub-Lieutenant and the RNAS Flight Lieutenant to Lieutenant#Naval rank, but we then hit a snag with the RNAS Flight Commander and Squadron Commander possibly both being equivalent to Lieutenant Commander, since there's also Wing Commander and Wing Captain in the RNAS, which presumably equate to Commander and Captain (naval). Then again, we could link the RNAS Flight Lieutenant to the modern air force Flight Lieutenant but, again, where does that put Flight Commander with regard to the modern air force ranks, since the RNAS Squadron Commander presumably equates to the air force Squadron Leader? Little was a Flight Commander in the RNAS and became a Captain (land) in the RAF, but in the modern air force a Flight Lieutenant is equivalent to a Captain... We can make reasonable assumptions but I don't know any reliable source that gives a definitive answer so the links will be open to question. Probably worth discussing but it goes beyond the scope of this particular article. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:10, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
- Clarification or a link about the RNAS rank structure might be in order; I was surprised that a Flight commander was only equivalent to a RAF captain, which also probably ought to be linked.
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
