Talk:HMS Jason (1800)

HMS Jason (1800) 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: February 28, 2022. (Reviewed version).

Ships

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles

Military history: Maritime / British / European / Early Modern / Napoleonic era

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

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	Early Modern warfare task force (c. 1500 – c. 1800)
	Napoleonic era task force (c. 1792 – 1815)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:HMS Jason (1800)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: No Great Shaker (talk · contribs) 16:44, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Review[edit]

Well written: the prose is clear and concise.
Well written: the spelling and grammar are correct.
Contains a short description which complies with recommendations.
Complies with the MOS guidelines for lead sections.
Complies with the MOS guidelines for article structure and layout.
Complies with the MOS guidelines for words to watch.
Complies with the MOS guidelines for writing about fiction – not applicable.
Complies with the MOS guidelines for list incorporation.
Complies with the MOS guidelines for use of quotations.
All statements are verifiable with inline citations provided.
All inline citations are from reliable sources, etc.
Contains a list of all references in accordance with the layout style guideline.
No original research.
No copyright violations or plagiarism.
Broad in its coverage but within scope and in summary style.
Neutral.
Stable.
Illustrated, if possible.
Images are at least fair use and do not breach copyright.

I'll be happy to do this review. Hope to provide some feedback soon. No Great Shaker (talk) 16:44, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Pickersgill-Cunliffe. Hope you are well. No need to beat about the bush with this one. It's excellent. An interesting piece of history that's very well written and easily passes this review. Well done and all the best. No Great Shaker (talk) 09:33, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]