Talk:HMS Resolution (09)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Peacemaker67 (talk · contribs) 02:22, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

This article is in great shape. I have a few comments/queries:

• was Resolution a super-dreadnought or dreadnought battleship? If so, perhaps state this in the lead and first section.
  • Done, good idea
• the designed displacement doesn't match between the body and infobox. check?
  • Hmm, I hadn't really checked the box because I figured when Sturm redid the design section and the box a few years back, he had taken care of it - either there was a slip up or some errors crept in during that time
• suggest "2 setspairs" as a set doesn't state how many?
  • Good idea
• the range doesn't match between the body and infobox. check?
  • Fixed
• shouldn't the crew numbers in the infobox be as designed/commissioned?
  • Yes
• mention in the body that the casemated guns were all single mounts?
  • Done
• 1929–1931 and 1932–1933 per MOS:DATERANGE
  • Fixed
• "the aft pair of torpedo tubes were also removed" but weren't they on the broadside? Same query re: "The forward pair of submerged torpedo tubes"
  • Right, all four on the broadside - the ones removed were the tubes furthest aft on each side
    • OK, then what about "the aft TT on either side were also removed"? ditto for the remaining TTs? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:00, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
      • Works for me. Parsecboy (talk) 12:48, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• "were replaced with QF 4-inch Mk XVI guns in Mk XIX twin mounts"
  • Good catch
• "nine 20 mm Oerlikons" and were these single mounts?
  • Fixed the plural, but I'll have to ping @Sturmvogel 66: since I don't have Raven & Roberts
• the crew numbers in the infobox aren't in the body?
  • Fixed
• link keel laying, ceremonial ship launching and ship commissioning?
  • Done
• Smryna→Smyrna
  • Fixed
• typo "in hte collision"
  • Fixed
• when Bévéziers torpedoed Resolution, were there casualties?
  • I would assume so, but Smith doesn't mention any, oddly enough. I can't find anything specific, but this indicates there were 39 British casualties] in the course of the operation, but both battleships were hit repeatedly by coastal guns, as were several other ships in the squadron, so who knows how many of those were from Resolution. There's a copy of The Guns of Dakar at OSU - I'll see if I can pick it up this week, maybe it'll have casualty details.
• "Australian Division" this was the 9th Division (Australia), not the 1st Division, and this was Operation Pamphlet
  • Fixed
• Queen Elizabeth-class battleship is duplinked
  • Removed
• no copyvio or plagiarism detected by the Earwig tool, just some sentence fragments from [1], consisting of common phrases.
• the EL of Photos of William S Barton HMS Resolution 1939-43 doesn't resolve for me.
  • Hmm, it's not working for me either - removed
• the cost in the infobox isn't in the body
  • Removed - I don't generally like including cost for things like this
• sources all good and properly formatted
• File:HMS Revenge (1916) profile drawing.png what was the source used to draw it?
  • Hmm, that might be a problem - the uploader retired in 2008 (though they have edited sporadically since then, including once in November 2018) - I'll leave a note but I don't expect a reply anytime soon (if at all).
    • Actually, per Nikki here, I should just be able to confirm the accuracy of the image with the sources I have, which is no problem at all. Parsecboy (talk) 17:10, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
      • The description covers this now. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:00, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• File:HMS Resolution FL18214.jpg could do with a small crop to get rid of the notation and border (not a GA requirement)
  • I'll see what I can do
    • Cropped version is now live. Parsecboy (talk) 17:24, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
• all the images have compliant licences.

Just placing on hold for the above to be addressed. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:37, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, PM! Parsecboy (talk) 15:38, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

No worries, I'm passing it as is. Just see my suggestion re: the TT removals, and remember the single mounts once Sturm gets back to you. This article is well-written, verifiable using reliable sources, covers the subject well, is neutral and stable, and contains no plagiarism. Images have appropriate licensing and captions. Nice work! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:00, 29 January 2019 (UTC)