![]() | USS Colhoun (DD-85) has been listed as one of the
Warfare good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: May 24, 2013. ( Reviewed version). |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
USS Colhoun (DD-85) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Miyagawa ( talk · contribs) 19:09, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
.... and I might as well review this one as as well, seeing as its the same class of vessel with the same editor. :) Miyagawa ( talk) 19:09, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
I prefer the wording in the lead for USS Breese (DD-122), I think specifying that the ship was later redesignated is better than what is currently at the top of this article.
Query: Being that this is a United States vessel, would it not be better to use the US format for dates? i.e. February 4, 1980 rather than 4 February 1980? I only mention it because this sort of thing is covered in
WP:STRONGNAT, but it says "should generally" rather than must, so I'll leave it up to you.
Service history: Any specifics on what sound equipment they were?
Is there any ties date-wise between her recommissioning as APD-2 and the naming of the new USS Colhoun? I know the new one wasn't laid down till three years later, but I'm just wondering about the ordering date.
World War II: Might be worth while merging that final line into the bottom of the previous paragraph as it looks unfinished there on its own.
External links: Could the photos link be expanded to say what website it is linking through to? Just a bit of fancy piping will be fine.
Just one duplicate link, references all look good. Images are all suitably licenced.
Nice work, not a great deal of changes needed to make this one a GA. Miyagawa ( talk) 19:53, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
![]() | USS Colhoun (DD-85) has been listed as one of the
Warfare good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: May 24, 2013. ( Reviewed version). |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
USS Colhoun (DD-85) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Miyagawa ( talk · contribs) 19:09, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
.... and I might as well review this one as as well, seeing as its the same class of vessel with the same editor. :) Miyagawa ( talk) 19:09, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
I prefer the wording in the lead for USS Breese (DD-122), I think specifying that the ship was later redesignated is better than what is currently at the top of this article.
Query: Being that this is a United States vessel, would it not be better to use the US format for dates? i.e. February 4, 1980 rather than 4 February 1980? I only mention it because this sort of thing is covered in
WP:STRONGNAT, but it says "should generally" rather than must, so I'll leave it up to you.
Service history: Any specifics on what sound equipment they were?
Is there any ties date-wise between her recommissioning as APD-2 and the naming of the new USS Colhoun? I know the new one wasn't laid down till three years later, but I'm just wondering about the ordering date.
World War II: Might be worth while merging that final line into the bottom of the previous paragraph as it looks unfinished there on its own.
External links: Could the photos link be expanded to say what website it is linking through to? Just a bit of fancy piping will be fine.
Just one duplicate link, references all look good. Images are all suitably licenced.
Nice work, not a great deal of changes needed to make this one a GA. Miyagawa ( talk) 19:53, 23 May 2013 (UTC)