Talk:HMS Jupiter (1895)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleHMS Jupiter (1895) 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.
Good topic starHMS Jupiter (1895) is part of the Predreadnought battleships of the Royal Navy series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 3, 2012Good article nomineeListed
August 23, 2020Good topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Good article

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:HMS Jupiter (1895)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ed! (talk · contribs) 14:07, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]


  • "Namesake" in the infobox needs a cite. Otherwise include it in the prose and cite it.
    • I can't find a citation for it, so I've removed it.
  • " all future British battleship classes had circular barbettes." -- what were the advantages of circular barbettes?
    • Conway's doesn't say, but I'd guess it's mostly a savings in weight to allow for more armor elsewhere.
  • "In 1908 and rendered obsolete by the emergence of the dreadnought class of battleships, " -- in the lead but not in the text. Needs to be cited.
    • Added a line on the advent of dreadnoughts in the body.
  • Also, which classes of battleship rendered this one obsolete? And what advances on their technology?
    • See above.
  • "After that she became an accommodation ship." -- what is an accommodation ship? Please clarify.
  • Dup link tool returns two results: flagship and Devonport.
    • Fixed.
References look good. Just a few small things. —Ed!(talk) 14:26, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just to note, my power was knocked out in that freak storm two nights ago, so my presence on wiki is going to be very limited until its restored. Parsecboy (talk) 11:16, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, everything should be addressed - let me know if there's anything else, and thanks for reviewin the article. Parsecboy (talk) 02:04, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Great work. Passing the GA now. —Ed!(talk) 14:11, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]