Talk:HMS Caradoc (D60)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 09:14, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

• Will review over the weekend. Miyagawa (talk) 09:14, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

• Ok, let's finally get to this. At least then it'll be before the following weekend!

• Image licence is good.
• No dab links.
• External links are all fine.
• Link C-class cruiser when it appears in the first sentence of Design and description (as it'll be the first appearance in the article body itself).
• Likewise, Royal Navy in the first sentence of Construction and career, and Grand Fleet in the same paragraph and Second Battle of Heligoland Bight in the following paragraph.
• Link Bolshevik in the third paragraph of that section where it appears for the first time.
  • Ummm, linked in the lede.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:40, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
• You can remove the link to Estonia.
  • I got chastised in a recent review for not linking (obscure) countries, and given the geographic illiteracy so common nowadays, I've taken that reviewer's comment to heart.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:40, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
• Link Chanak Crisis where it appears in the article body (it only appears once there and once in the lead).
• Second World War: [Pound sterling|£]two million - the wikilink is broken.
• New York City 28 October 1941–26 February 1942 - stick "between" inbetween City and 28.
• South Africa, 21 June–3 July - throw a between in there too.
• Link East Indies Fleet towards the end - either piped to Eastern Fleet, or skip that and then just link Eastern Fleet when you specifically mention it.
• References are all good, and I like the research template.

• @Sturmvogel 66: That's everything - it's just all fiddling with links mostly. Miyagawa (talk) 19:33, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks for reviewing this, Miyagawa. I generally only link on first use, regardless of location in an article of this length.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:40, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
    • No worries - I just checked WP:REPEATLINK and it isn't particularly clear about whether there should be multiple links or not. It isn't helpful when a guideline throws a "general" in there and then contradicts itself in the following sentence! So happy to leave things as they are. Passing. Miyagawa (talk) 22:00, 25 March 2016 (UTC)