Talk:HMS Northumberland (1866)

HMS Northumberland (1866) 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.
Review: August 15, 2013. (Reviewed version).

Ships

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles

Military history: Maritime / British / European

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:HMS Northumberland (1866)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Tomobe03 (talk · contribs) 18:54, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this article shortly.--Tomobe03 (talk) 18:54, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Checklinks reports all external links are in order (no action required)
No disambiguation links (no action required)
There are few duplicate links in the article: Bulkhead (partition), Wrought iron and Naval ram- these should be removed per WP:OVERLINK
All images have appropriate captions and licences (no action required)
Article appears to be stable (no action required)
There are data discrepancies between the prose and the infobox. Specifically, the beam is variously indicated as 59'6" and 58'6". Draft is indicated as 26'10" and 27'9". Obviously those should be corrected as applicable.

Nice article with very few things to mend before it meets GA criteria. Good work.--Tomobe03 (talk) 12:04, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review; all done.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 04:39, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]