From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer:
Dana boomer (
talk ·
contribs)
23:22, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
reply
Hi! I'll take this article for review, and should have my full comments up by later tonight.
Dana boomer (
talk)
23:22, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
reply
-
GA review (see
here for what the criteria are, and
here for what they are not)
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar):
b (
MoS for
lead,
layout,
word choice,
fiction, and
lists):
- I'm sure you've checked the IP addition from April 5 to make sure everything is solid there?
- Yeah, it's the standard note explaining SMS and the translation of the ship's name.
- Lead, "but was thereafter used as a target ship until 1918. She was thereafter sold" - close repetition of "thereafter".
- Changed the second one to "later"
- Second deployment abroad, "presence was unnecessary there." I think the "there" is unnecessary.
- Second deployment abroad, "German East Africa to replace Bussard there." Again, the "there" doesn't seem to be adding anything.
- 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:
- Overall very solid, just a few minor comments on prose. Placing the article on hold until these can be addressed.
Dana boomer (
talk)
23:47, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
reply
- Thanks yet again, I think everything should be corrected.
Parsecboy (
talk)
12:10, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
reply
- And again everything looks good, so passing to GA.
Dana boomer (
talk)
16:21, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
reply