Talk:Project SAINT/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · contribs) 03:55, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

• Section 1;
  • Some context would be required on "National Intelligence Estimate 11-5-57"

 Done

• • GOR-170? What do you mean by GOR?

 Done

• • Mention "DARPA" in full on the first mention, also mention ARPA in full

 Done

• • United States Air Force was over linked

 Done

• Section 1.1; All good
• Section 1.2;
  • Expand NORAD

 Done

• • The third phase of the project included several elements. These included: a powerful main engine; suggest rewording this as "The third phase of the project included several elements such as powerful main engine"

 Done

• • Link "surface-to-air missiles"

 Done

• • and four cameras to allow its operator to observe; suggest "and four cameras for observation"

 Done

• • infrared, gravimetric sensors

 Done

• • 12 meters (39 ft), 60 meters (200 ft); abrreviate, use |abbr=on

I am unsure of how to implement this, If you wish for it to be 12 m (39ft) I can do that manually. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 05:03, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Go for it. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 05:13, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

 Done

• • Cape Canaveral, is over linked

 Done

• • within range of one? What is this phrase, suggest explaining in general language

 Done

• Section 1.3;
  • for December of 1962; just "for December 1962"

 Done

• • The plan was originally for four SAINT launches -> It was planned to the launch four satellites

 Done

• • the then Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, remove "the"

 Done

• Lead;
  • bold "SAtellite INTerceptor"

 Done

• Reference 4; 1963–65; make it 1963–1965, per MOS:DATERANGE

 Done

• Suggest adding an infobox. This is out of GA criteria, just a suggestion

Sounds good, would I use a infobox for a military operation, or for a satellite? Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 05:03, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Suggest {{Infobox research project}}. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 05:13, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

 Done

• All images are appropriately licensed
• External links are good. Suggest archiving them, as a precaution.

I don't have much experience with archiving links. Would I just use the Wayback machine and then cite the URL given by Wayback, or is there another way of doing it? Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 05:03, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, do it the same way. Just archive them. Even if they are dead in future, we can use the archives. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 05:13, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

 Done.

• 25% violation, unlikely. If possible rephrase some.

 Done.

Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 03:55, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

• @Krishna Chaitanya Velaga: I believe I have fixed all of the issues you have raised, aside from the URL archiving, the infobox and the abbreviation template. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 05:03, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

@Krishna Chaitanya Velaga: I believe that is everything. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 12:30, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

• @Krishna Chaitanya Velaga: Are you ready to pass it as it is right now, or do you feel it needs more work? Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 02:38, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

---

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.

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

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 11:22, 13 January 2017 (UTC)