Talk:Bombing of the Banski Dvori/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs) 17:38, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
- Too much detail in the lede. It's supposed to be a summary of the main body, not repeat information from it nearly verbatim. Details like the exact payload used in the attack should not be in the lede. Instead say that it was attacked with rockets and bombs, etc.
- Better, but still too much detail. Don't care what types of aircraft or bombs were used, nor why Tudman was meeting with Mesic and Markovic. The only important thing is that they were there. Remember it's a summary with all the details presented in the main body.
- Summarized some more.--Tomobe03 (talk) 11:06, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
- Better, but still too much detail. Don't care what types of aircraft or bombs were used, nor why Tudman was meeting with Mesic and Markovic. The only important thing is that they were there. Remember it's a summary with all the details presented in the main body.
- Most references to Banski dvori should use the article "the", forex Yugoslav Air Force attacked Banski dvori
- At the time of the attack Croatian President - needs a comma after attack
- Simplify this: Martin Špegelj, who held the post of defence minister of Croatia to "Martin Špegelj, the defence minister of Croatia" Generally, fewer words is better than more.
- Combine these two sentences: the Soviet ambassador to Belgrade was reported to have received instructions to deliver a Soviet warning to the Yugoslav military against attacking Zagreb. The instructions contained information on imminent military action.
- Defense Ministry, etc. should be capitalized.
- Delete the "the" in this: and Ante Marković, the then Prime Minister of Yugoslavia
- Add "the" between the comma and United States: In response to the situation, United States consulate
- Photo licensing is good.
- No DABs and external links are good.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:38, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for volunteering your time and effort to reviewing (and hopefully improving) this article. I tried to address all the issues you raised above, and I'm confident I got all of them sorted out - could you please have another look at those, especially use of the definite article ahead of "Banski dvori" (admittedly a weak point of mine). Thanks!--Tomobe03 (talk) 18:45, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
- Missed this on the first read through, what's "a certain degree of damage"? Be more precise, lightly damaged, moderately, etc. Or just plain damaged.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 03:47, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
- Rephrased--Tomobe03 (talk) 09:32, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for volunteering your time and effort to reviewing (and hopefully improving) this article. I tried to address all the issues you raised above, and I'm confident I got all of them sorted out - could you please have another look at those, especially use of the definite article ahead of "Banski dvori" (admittedly a weak point of mine). Thanks!--Tomobe03 (talk) 18:45, 17 March 2013 (UTC)