Talk:EVA Air/GA1

GA Review

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   The lead is a bit unstructured, for instance the pronunciation should follow in the first line as part of the name. The sentence "EVA Air is the largest privately owned Taiwanese airline" is not good, and partially POV, since it fails to explain the reader the most critical information, namely that EVA Air is the second largest airline in Taiwan. For better flow, move then mention of China Airlines here. The lead is a little short, so adding the odd sentence will not hurt, but this sentence—"EVA Air was also the first Taiwanese airline to be accredited by the IATA with the IOSA (IATA Operational Safety Audit) for its safety practices, and is ranked as one of the world's safest airlines by German aviation magazine AERO International."—says nothing important at all, see more about this later in the review (under NPOV). The lead should also specify that the airline is international only (since most international airlines also operate domestically). There is no mention of the fleet in the lead. Per WP:MOSNUM, the autoformatting of numbers is no longer to take place—so please remove all linked dates. Do not repeat "EVA Air" in section heading, just keep the other bit; also do not start section heading with "the" ("The launch of EVA Air" should be "Launch"). Avoid bolding once bolding has occured the first time (i.e. don't bold in the history section). Why is "Cargo" in "EVA Air Cargo" in italics? The MoS prohibits the imitation of stylistic in visual brands. Please remove all instances of italic "Cargo". The MoS strongly discourages use of periods in abbreviations (such as U.S.) and normally country names should always be fully spelt (i.e. United States). Whenever there is a range, use a endash (–) instead of a hyphen (-) (more info at WP:DASH). Throughout the whole article, some cities are mentioned with their country following, and some are without—try to be consistent one way or another (do not presume the level of geographic knowledge of the reader). "In total, " is totally redundant—why should it not be in total? (not a GA requirement). While "President Chen Hsing-Te" is correct capitalization, "EVA Air's President" is not to use capital P. I am confused as to the ownership of the company. Is it fully owned by the Evergreen Group, or only in part—in which case who owns the rest of the company. I presume it is not public (in which case it would have to be stated). This fragment—"Established as the airline for the local people"—is POV and should either be removed or in quotes. The section "Travel subsidiaries" is too short, and should be included in a different section (for instance management). Aircraft types should not be wikilinked after their first mention (except in a list). Do not mention seat pitch in '"', but use {{convert}} to provide pitch—use metric first as this covers a metric-country airline. "Audio Video on Demand" is not a proper noun, and should not be capitalized. The sections in "cabin classes" are too short for separate sections—instead use one paragraph cleverly worded to establish the class in the beginning of the sentence. Never use the term "currently" since it is unknown when conditions change without the article being updated. ' "Star Gallery," ' is incorrectly quoted—just by using capital letters it is shown that the term is a proper name. I would advice merging "Onboard", "Evergreen Club" and "VIP Lounges" into one header (though they can remain as sub-headers). I presume "VIP Lounge" is the brand name for their airline hubs. In this case, show that that is the brand name, and describe it as an airline lounge. The "Codeshare agreement" section should be incorporated into another section, and converted into prose. Except for "List of Taiwanese companies", the three other see also links are linked to in the article—making their see also-use redundant. The external links should be reformatted so the link name states Offical site (not as a suffix), and use {{zh icon}} to show the Mandarin site language.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   Ref 13 is dead, while ref 21 exceeds eight redirects. Otherwise very good referencing.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   See section four.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   The article for the most part written neutrally, but overall there is a total avoidance of negative circumstances. I do not believe an international airline can go twenty years without some sorts of problems or incidents (not just technical/accidents, but also related to PR, customer relations etc). If they have a clean accident sheet, that is worth writing as well. Please address this in other sections, or its own, in a NPOV way.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Image:EVA Air Evergreen Club Green card.jpg currently holds an invalid fair use rationale, claiming it is a logo. I have difficulty seeing a fair use permitting the image, so I think it has to go. Image:EVA_HKG_lounge.jpg is not "upright" and the default size. There is generally a lot of white space in the article—move images or consider removing similar images. More images can always be seen on the Commons, for those of us that like just looking at pictures of aircraft in pretty green colors.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   There are a lot of issues, especially related to violation of the MoS. I expect editors that submit articles to GA to have read and understood the MoS, since there are many pitfalls related to MoS in the GA review. If all the issues covered in the article are seen to, the article will probably pass. The article is placed on hold for up to one week while the issues are seen to. That said, the references were excellent, and the article generally reads well. So it is just the last few meters left to the finish line—good luck! Arsenikk ^(talk) 20:46, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Further improvements

Thank you for the recommendations. I have followed up on them, and made the following changes:

Prose/MoS

• Pronounciation of 'EVA Air' moved
• EVA Air as the 2nd largest, clarified
• Safety practices sentence removed
• International only mentioned
• Fleet mentioned in lead
• All linked dates were removed
• EVA Air not in section heads
• Launch section retitled
• No more bolding
• Cargo not italics
• No more period abbreviations
• Date ranges use endash
• Cities now mentioned signly, except for the lead (Taiwan), and state (El Segundo California)
• Ownership of company, largest shareholders given in %
• "airline for the local people" quote removed
• Travel subsidiary section combined with management
• Aircraft type wikilinks reduced to 1x
• {{convert}} pitch used
• Audio video on demand no longer capitalized
• Cabin classes now one section
• 'currently' removed
• Star Gallery not in quotes
• Onboard/club/lounge sections merged
• VIP lounge stated as brand+lounge
• Codeshare section merged
• See also links reduced
• External links reformatted

References

• Refs 13, 21 replaced (#s refer to the earlier version at the time of initial review)

Broad/NPOV

• Incidents section added, and accident record info stated (clean record for major incidents, other events detailed)

Images

• Images reduced, moved to reduce white space

Thanks for being specific, the detail was very helpful! Thank you for your consideration, and advice. Regards, SynergyStar (talk) 06:16, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations with a Good Article! I did a small copyedit to avoid a single-sentence paragraph in the lead. Arsenikk ^(talk) 08:29, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

On behalf of the editors who have contributed to this article, thank you! SynergyStar (talk) 18:19, 22 September 2008 (UTC)