Talk:Chinese cruiser Yangwei/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · contribs) 00:36, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Will take this one. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 00:36, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - I'll be making any amendments you suggest in this review to the Chaoyong as well. I haven't nominated that one for GA yet, as I have concerns over the licencing for the image currently in the infobox (as well as all the images of the ship at Commons). Miyagawa (talk) 09:47, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Section 1;
- larger Ironclad warships; de-capitalize "I" in "Ironcald"
  - Done. Miyagawa (talk) 13:42, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Flat-iron gunboats; de-capitalize "F"
  - Done. Miyagawa (talk) 13:42, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- along with a higher muzzle velocity main battery to attack larger,^[2][3] more cumbersome foes – very similar to the principles of Jeune École; This sentence is a bit confusing. The dash must be unspaced em dash. Who is Jeune École? "more cumbersome foes" is a bit awkward.
  - I've re-written that part of the sentence. I'd tried to incorporate the text from the previous version, but the Jeune Ecole idea is going off topic, so I've removed it. Miyagawa (talk) 13:42, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Why is the context of Chilean Navy brought in here? Please explain clearly. Is there is any agreement between the governments to use the ship's model or it was just copied?
  - There were three of this type of cruiser built - one for the Chilean Navy (which ended up being bought by the Japanese at launch), and then two for the Chinese. I've moved the arguments around so that it makes this clearer. Miyagawa (talk) 13:42, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Charles Mitchell; some context on nationality and profession
  - Done. Miyagawa (talk) 13:42, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

- the exactly design -> the exact design
  - I managed to remove this bit entirely following the couple of previous changes. Miyagawa (talk) 13:42, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Conversion for 5.1-inch guns; also remove -
  - Done. Miyagawa (talk) 13:42, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- abbreviate units from second mention, in some case they are, but not in some. For example, 57 millimetres (2.2 in), 37 millimetres (1.5 in), 15.5 feet (4.7 m) etc.
  - Hopefully that should all be right now. Miyagawa (talk) 13:42, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Section 2;
- Remove the dates regarding Chaoyong, they are out of context
  - Done. Miyagawa (talk) 13:42, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- reduce the use on "although" in the final lines of para 3
  - Removed all but one. Miyagawa (talk) 13:42, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- All good with section 2.1
Lead; all good
All images are properly licensed.
There is one dab link, please fix this.
- Done. Miyagawa (talk) 13:42, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
O% violation, well done.
External links are fine.

Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 12:39, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've made those changes as requested. Miyagawa (talk) 13:42, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
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 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):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 13:50, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]