Talk:HMS Collingwood (1908)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Peacemaker67 (talk · contribs) 22:29, 21 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 converted figures for range differ slightly between the text and infobox were the secondary guns that were mounted in pairs on the turrets actually single mounts, or pairs? The infobox makes it appear they were all singles, but the text indicates pair mounting, so it's a bit unclear. the belt armour thickness in the text doesn't reduce (ie 10 to 10) despite saying it did suggest From 22 October to 3 November, she was based... the dates imply brevity suggest based on extensive reconnaissance conducted by Zeppelins and submarines "Collingwood received a brief" (respite?) suggest recovered the bodies of three men Maririmequest (in ELs) should be Maritimequest all addressed. Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 03:45, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	a brief sentence describing her service at Jutland would be an appropriate addition to the leadY
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.	minor point, but the Judd citation doesn't point to the ref
	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.	the infobox image should have the same license as the image of her shortly after completion Maybe. The latter was released by the IWM itself and its license may not apply to the former. I'm going to contact the uploader of the latter for more information.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:53, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply] Fae is on a Wikibreak, but I've emailed him asking for clarification anyway. He may or may not respond.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:12, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply] He replied very promptly and said that the templates used by his uploaded photo were not necessary for other ones and that the non-commercial license claimed by the IWM was not in accordance with UK or US law. See [1] for the correspondence between him and the IWM.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:30, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply] That pretty much wraps it up for the IWM... Thanks, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 22:50, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	~~Placing on hold for seven days for above points to be addressed~~ All comments addressed, passing. Well done. Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 03:45, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All done with these with the exception of the Judd reference where I'm not sure what you mean. Can you clarify that bit, please?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:49, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have a script running that identifies when this is happening. You appear to have used ref names for the rest of the citations, but not for Judd. As a result, the citation anchor doesn't point to the Judd book in the Bibliography. I also just noticed that Burt is out of alpha order (should be after the two Brady refs). Anywho, not a barrier to GA, so I'm passing. Regards, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 03:45, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]