Talk:HMS Tiger (1913)/GA1

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Jim Sweeney (talk) 09:30, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): 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, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Comments[edit]

Two dab links needs rectifying TNT and Decommissioned which is a redirect to the disamb page Decommissioning
Ref 16 and 20 need a publisher added

Done

Ref 62 needs an access date

Done

Ref 31 needs the year added

Done

The last sentences in the Postwar service sections need referencing

Deleted

Alt text could be added to the images

not part of the review but the Imperial War Museum have images of the damage sustained after Jutland which could be added if you want. Search on HMS Tiger http://www.iwmcollections.org.uk/qryMain.php

Added one.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:42, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on.--Jim Sweeney (talk) 09:30, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Passed --Jim Sweeney (talk) 21:33, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]