Talk:USS West Alsek/GA1

GA Review

Hi! I am going to be doing the GA review for this article, and I should have the full review up within a few hours. Dana boomer (talk) 23:47, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   • In the "Design and construction" section, you say " built by the Skinner & Eddy of Seattle, Washington.[1][Note 1]". Should this be "built by the Skinner & Eddy shipyard", or "built by Skinner & Eddy"?
     • I originally had "Skinner and Eddy Corpoation", hence the extra the. Now removed.
   • In the "Military career" section, you say "other surviving ships of the convoy and arrived at Verdon-sur-mer". Is there supposed be something before "and arrived"?
     • It was missing a "continued on"
   • Same section, you say "After unloading her cargo of flour and her return to the United States,". Perhaps, "cargo of flour and returning to the..."?
     • Better option. Changed.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

   • I see the DANFS article on the Montanan listed in the bibliography section, but not in the references section. Am I missing something?
     • Just an oversight after I went with a different source.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

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):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Another well-written article! I am putting the article on hold to allow you time to deal with the few minor quibbles above. Let me know if you have any questions. Dana boomer (talk) 23:58, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Everything looks good, so I'm passing the article to GA status. Dana boomer (talk) 18:10, 2 September 2008 (UTC)