Jump to content

Talk:Uskok-class torpedo boat/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · contribs) 15:06, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Will come back shortly. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 15:06, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Section 1; para 1; Suggest mentioning the full word for "16.77 m (55 ft 0 in)" instead of abbreviation as it is the first mention of the unit.
  • Done.
  • Section 1; para 1; 15 tonnes (15 long tons); As far as I know 15 tons goes to 14.7631 long tonnes, I know this because due to the limitations of decimals in the conversion template. May be you increase the decimal limit, because some readers may feel that tonne=long ton.
  • Good point, done.
  • Section 1; para 1; 750 hp (560 kW); mention horsepower in full for the first time and also link it.
  • Done.
  • What is commissioning date or year? It is never mentioned.
  • only the laid down and launch dates are in the sources.
  • Could something more about their service could be added?
  • I've dragged together what there is from the sources, but they were a small class that wasn't up to cruises in the Mediterranean, so there probably isn't a lot to say prior to the war.
Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 11:39, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the review, Krishna! Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:05, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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) 12:03, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]