Talk:HMS Anne (1915)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Anotherclown (talk · contribs) 10:03, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Progression

• Version of the article when originally reviewed: [1]
• Version of the article when review was closed: [2]

Technical review

• Citations: The Citation Check tool reveals no errors (no action required).
• Disambiguations: two dab links [3]:
  • Armenian
  • Tarsus
• Linkrot: External links check out [4] (no action required).
• Alt text: Image lacks alt text [5] (suggestion only).
• Copyright violations: The Earwig Tool is currently not working, however spot checks using Google reveal no issues [6] (no action required).

Criteria

• It is reasonably well written.

  a (prose): b (MoS):

  • Missing word here: "...several Allied ships that were going bombard Smyrna, Turkey..."
  • Typo here: "...until the end of the months...", perhaps "...until the end of the month..."
  • Missing word here: "...and its primary duty was watch Turkish positions..."
  • Minor inconsistency in language as you use "Turkish" and "Ottoman" interchangably. Might pay to be consistent.
    • All done.

• It is factually accurate and verifiable.

  a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

  • Some large paragraphs only have a single citation at the end. I assume this is because the entire paragraph is referenced to that citation? It might pay to increase the citation density to make this clear, although I don't believe it is a requirement (suggestion only).
    • It is.
  • Consistent citation style used throughout.
  • No issues with OR.

• It is broad in its coverage.

  a (major aspects): b (focused):

  • Article appears to cover all major aspects.

• It follows the neutral point of view policy.

  a (fair representation): b (all significant views):

  • No issues here.

• It is stable.

  No edit wars etc.:

  • Significant recent work, although it all looks constructive.

• It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.

  a (tagged and captioned): b (Is illustrated with appropriate images): c (non-free images have fair use rationales): d public domain pictures appropriately demonstrate why they are public domain:

  • Image has a fair use rationale and appears to be appropriate for the article.

• Overall:

  a Pass/Fail:

  • This article looks fairly close to meeting the criteria, just a couple of prose issues and the question about citations. Happy to discuss any points you disagree with. Anotherclown (talk) 10:48, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
    • Thanks for the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:48, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
      • Too easy. Passing review now. Anotherclown (talk) 07:47, 28 November 2011 (UTC)