Talk:French cruiser Marseillaise (1900)

French cruiser Marseillaise (1900) 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 8, 2020. (Reviewed version).

Military history: Maritime / European / French / World War I

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
	European military history task force
	French military history task force
	World War I task force

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

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:French cruiser Marseillaise (1900)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Djmaschek (talk · contribs) 00:10, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I will review this article. Djmaschek (talk) 00:10, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

Pass. Here is my review. Djmaschek (talk) 04:00, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox vs. narrative

The infobox data matches the narrative exactly. Pictures all are in public domain. Long dashes are used where appropriate.

Question

Roche is listed under References, but not cited. I've been scolded about doing this by reviewers of my articles. However, I looked up WP:NOTES and apparently general references can be listed alongside cited references. So I assume Roche is a general reference. Correct?
- He's used in cite 13.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 11:54, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Typos and clarifications

I already edited the following.

Armament and armor, Paragraph 1, sentence 3 typo: two singe-gun > two single-gun.
Armament and armor, Paragraph 1, sentence 3 clarity: Half of the 164.7 mm > Four of the 164.7 mm.
World War I, Paragraph 3, sentence 1 clarity: 18 December > 18 December 1918.
World War I, Paragraph 3, sentence 2 typo: and was was part > and was part.

Suggestion

The following sentence in the introduction was grammatically correct, but I found it hard to follow because of the distance between "The ship" and the last clause. You don't have to fix it, but please consider...

The ship returned to the Mediterranean the following year, but was assigned to the 2nd Squadron (3e Escadre), as the units based in northwestern France had been renamed, in 1911, together with two of her sisters.
SUGGEST: Together with two of her sisters, the ship returned to the Mediterranean the following year, but was assigned to the 2nd Squadron (3e Escadre), as the units based in northwestern France had been renamed in 1911.
- Good idea, although I've tweaked the wording slightly. And thanks for the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 12:01, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]