Integrated Visual Augmentation System (final version) received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which on 13 December 2023 was archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
A fact from Integrated Visual Augmentation System appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 19 March 2024 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
(b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);[2]
^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.
^This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.
^Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.
^Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
^The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
Overall: Article meets all necessary criteria, ALT1 hook is well worded and appropriately sourced. No issues with image either, appropriately licensed, clear depiction of the item. grungaloo (talk) 18:15, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The main hook uses a WP:PRIMARY source as a citation, coupled with the wording it makes it sound a bit promotional. ALT1 is also a bit off with WP:NPOV, but I think it could be fixed by rewording it to "some Microsoft engineers". The source indicates that it was a subset who felt this way and not all. QPQ is still outstanding too. Let me know what you think! grungaloo (talk) 18:15, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the review! I've changed ALT1 to use the specific number of opposing employees, which hopefully helps with the NPOV issue. WP:QPQ isn't required for first five noms; this is my first time at DYK, so I wanted to experience the process first before reviewing. Liu1126 (talk) 20:51, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article meets all necessary criteria, ALT1 hook is well worded and appropriately sourced. No issues with image either, appropriately licensed, clear depiction of the item. grungaloo (talk) 18:15, 14 February 2024 (UTC)