Talk:Royal Yugoslav Navy/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · contribs) 00:27, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Well constructed, will get back shortly. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 00:27, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Lead

• Para 1; last sentence; There's a comma(,) missing after "In the late 1920s"
  • Done.
• Para 3; first sentence; I think instead of "crews" it must be "crew", because "crew" itself define as — a group of people who work on and operate a ship, aircraft, etc.
  • Yes, but in this case there were several aircraft/vessels so "crews" (plural) is appropriate.
• Please add a note/correct - the years of existence as it is a bit confusing. The "Kingdom of Yugoslavia" existed between 1918–1920, but Royal Yugoslav Navy between 1920–1945. The same follows to the Infobox.
  • Not sure what you are getting at here. It is hard to determine exactly when the Navy was established, but it is reasonable to use October 1920 (when transfer of ships was agreed). Prior to that, the Navy only existed in a bureaucratic sense, in terms of the Navy Department of the Ministry of Army and Navy. By rights, March 1921 marked the formal transfer of vessels, so I've adjusted the lead and infobox to reflect that. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:57, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

• Please clarify this using a footnote. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 13:11, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Infobox

• Consider the date ranges as mentioned above.
• I see that {{Infobox military unit}} was used, but {{Infobox national military}} fits better.
  • I don't agree. That is more for the armed forces as a whole, ie Royal Yugoslav Armed Forces, not a service branch. See United States Navy, for example.
• As for the role, is it only responsible for "Coastal defence"? It has also participated in wars and international activities. Consider revising this.
  • Yes, just coastal defence. Per the stated role in the text of the article. According to the sources, it was never intended to do more than that. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:57, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

• In that case, better clarify the same using something such as a footnote. For example, {{efn}} or similar templates. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 11:53, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

• Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:42, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Section 1

Section 1.1

• Para 1; The sentence "On 30 October, the Austro-Hungarian naval staff transmitted orders to all its commanders directing them hand over al..." may be reworded as On 30 October, the Austro-Hungarian naval staff ordered all its commanders directing them hand over al.........
  • Done.
• In the above sentence, I feel a "the" missing before "representatives of the National Council".
  • Done.
• Para 3; While the Serbian ministries were mentioned "the" was used before the services, for example, "Serbian Ministry of the Army", "Ministry of the Army and Navy" etc. Is "the" fits correct in them. If this is the way, then it was mentioned wrongly in the third para of Section 1.3.1 where it was mentioned as "Ministry of Army and Navy". Please correct them accordingly throughout the article.
  • Made consistent with the majority of sources.
• Para 3; Usage of the year "1919" may be reduced in the later sentences of the para, per MOS:DATEVAR, if there is no ambiguity.
  • Done in a couple of cases.
• Para 3; Last sentence; I prefer it to be removed, because we are not the ones to judge it is a modest request or not. One may feel the other way. Per WP:NPOV, consider removing this or rewording it that the nature of the request is not judged.
  • This is actually the judgement of the source (Vego), not mine, so I believe it should stay. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:09, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Section 1.2

• Para 3; sentence 2; Remove the capitalization of "A" in "Arsenal".
  • Have changed it to Tivat Arsenal, its proper name in English. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:10, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Section 1.3

Section 1.3.1

• Para 1; sentence 1; "of" in the sentence "...al staff which consisted of former Royal Serbian Army gene..." may be removed, al staff which consisted former Royal Serbian Army generals .... would do.
  • I disagree, the grammar would not be correct.
• Para 2; Sentence 2; It must be "In the same year," not "In that same year".
  • Done.
• Para 2; last sentence; Year "1929" may be dropped per DATEVAR.
  • Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:16, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Section 1.3.2

• Para 1; sentence 3; "of that year" may be removed. "In July , the two Hrabri-...." is good.
  • Done.
• Para 2; sentence 1; Correct the spelling of "focused", it is mentioned "focussed".
  • "focussed" is the most common spelling in Australia and New Zealand (I live in Australia).
• Para 2; sentence 2 from the end; Year "1934" may be dropped per DATEVAR.
  • Done.
• Para 4; last sentence; Year "1937" may be dropped per DATEVAR.
  • Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:21, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Section 1.4

• No issues found. All good.

Loved reading the article besides a few errors. Will review the remaining section shortly. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 12:36, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Section 1.5

• Para 1; sentence 1; Consider replacing "...,the first blows were struck from the air" with "..., the initial attacks came from the air" or "..., the initial attacks were from the air".
• Para 2; sentence 2; In "...lished, Beograd, four of the 250t-class torpedo boats and s...", "of the" may be removed. Just "four 250t-class torpedo boats" is enough.
  • Both done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:44, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Section 1.6

• Para 2; last sentence; It is mentioned that Dubrovnikand Beograd were not sunk by Allied forces until April and May 1945. There is some confusion here. What does it mean by until, are they after May 1945, if so mention that clearly.
  • I don't see the confusion, and think the sentence is pretty clear. Dubrovnik was sunk in April and Beograd was sunk in May, both by Allied forces.
• Image: I think the caption must be "The destroyer Zagreb, that was scuttled by two of its junior officers".
  • Not sure it is necessary, but done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:46, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Section 2

No issues.

Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 13:11, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

---

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 03:11, 2 October 2016 (UTC)