Talk:RAF Uxbridge/GA1

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

Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:14, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   Several tags need to be addressed

   B.

   lists

   :

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A.

   References to sources

   :

   Same as Northolt comment

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   List of tenant units over time as per Northolt article needed.

   A list of units has been added. Harrison49 (talk) 22:06, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

   B. Focused:

4. Is it
   neutral
   ?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. 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

   :

   Needs a map showing location.

   A request has been raised for a map at

   Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Map workshop. Harrison49 (talk) 19:06, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply

   ]

   Fair enough.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 03:29, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

   As an alternative, there is the drop-down map which comes from the coordinates at the top of the article. Harrison49 (talk) 16:38, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

You don't seem to be using any of the sources in the Bibliography. Delete them or move them to a "further reading" section if you want to keep them in the article.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:40, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, these weren't added by myself. I've renamed the section as Further reading. Harrison49 (talk) 20:01, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]