Talk:HSwMS Loke (1869)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleHSwMS Loke (1869) 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 starHSwMS Loke (1869) is part of the John Ericsson class monitors 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
October 11, 2010Good article nomineeListed
October 31, 2010Good topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Good article

Builder[edit]

Isn't Motala Verkstad in Motala? Geschichte (talk) 16:53, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They had a shipyard in Norrköping back then.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:14, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:HMS Loke (1869)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Skinny87 (talk) 11:10, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]


GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    Lede is slightly anaemic, and could do with another sentence to flesh it out.
    I honestly don't know what to add; there's already pretty serious duplication between the lead and the service para.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    Do we know why funds were withheld from her when requested?
    Not specifically, but probably because it was thought obsolete.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. 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):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

One small question, possibly unanswerable, and an expansion to the lede, and this will be good to go. Skinny87 (talk) 11:10, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]