Talk:HMS St Vincent (1908)/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Peacemaker67 (talk · contribs) 14:31, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	the initial crew total in the text and infobox don't match the range conversions in the text and infobox don't match the armour thickness of the transverse bulkheads in the text and infobox don't match no conversions for the conning tower armour in the text the date ordered in the text and infobox doesn't match Colossus should probably be HMS Colossus at first mention (same for Hercules later on) suggest comma after "...14:20" suggest ...that his ship was monitoring strong radio signals on the frequency used by the German High Seas Fleet, that implied the Germans were nearby. Further signals were monitored at 14:52.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	no citations for the last three sentences of the last paragraph of the article
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Both are clearly PD
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	~~Placing on hold for seven days for comments to be addressed~~ Passing GAN, well done. Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 00:48, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've addressed all of your points, although I didn't use your suggested phrasing for the signal intercept bit. See if my version suits. Generally, I only use ship prefixes if there's some sort of opportunity to confuse the nationality of the ships mentioned. Thanks for your review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:18, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Almost forgot the conversion for 11 inches was made a sentence or two ahead of the conning tower sentence.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:20, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, happy all points have been addressed. Passing. Regards, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 00:48, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]