# Talk:April 23, 1998, Albanian–Yugoslav border ambush

How does www.kosova.com stack up against WP:RS? Cheers, Peacemaker67  (crack... thump) 02:42, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

I assume your referring to the Kosovo Information Center?? 23 editor (talk) 16:58, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
Yep. What's the story with that? Peacemaker67  (crack... thump) 21:53, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
I figured it would show the Albanian view of the incident. Probably not WP:RS, but referenced in contemporary news accounts. 23 editor (talk) 23:32, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:April 23, 1998 Albanian–Yugoslav border ambush/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Dawnseeker2000 (talk · contribs) 18:40, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I'll be reviewing this article starting sometime today or tomorrow. Thanks, Dawnseeker2000 18:40, 31 October 2015 (UTC)


### GA checklist
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
This is a nicely-arranged article that is a good read
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

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): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 


### Section comments
I have read the article and have made several minor copy edits, but I am completely unfamiliar with the Balkans and the content of the article. To start with though, my initial impression is that the writing is very good, so I think most of what I'll be doing on this one is citation verification.
On that note, and keeping in mind that I am totally unfamiliar with the subject, I have done spot checks on the online sources and I've found that the content that's written aligns nicely with the sources. The refs are considered reliable and are formatted in compliance with the manual of style. I'm really only able to say positive things about this article. It's neutral and balanced and the presentation is great: nice full paragraphs, a tidy infobox, and adequate sources.
After reading the article and comparing what the sources say, all I really have to offer is a possible internal link to add in the Clash section. 23 editor, I think it will be fine to mark this as a good article. Great work!

Infobox
The infobox is uncluttered and has a free image that gives the reader a perfect sense of the terrain at the location of the incident.
Lead
This section adequately previews the content of the article
Background
In the first sentence where it says "which by then was just a rump federation". I had to look this up, but found that the usage is perfect in this manner. Entry #3
Clash
I think the writing conveys what is being said very well and is neither overly-wordy or too concise. We might want to link Artillery.
Aftermath
No comments on this section. The writing looks good here as well.
Excellent. Thanks for the review! 23 editor (talk) 23:26, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on April 23, 1998 Albanian–Yugoslav border ambush. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/europe/9804/23/yugo.referendum.update/index.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:18, 30 March 2016 (UTC)