Talk:HMS Kent (54)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:HMS Kent (54)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

I'll review this article later today.

Reviewer: Nick-D (talk) 22:54, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Everything looks pretty good and the GA criteria are met. I don't see any significant barriers to getting this article to A class, and my comments for its further development are:

• "Kent hunted the German pocket battleship Admiral Graf Spee in the East Indies in late 1939" and "she joined with the French heavy cruiser Suffren and the Australian destroyers Voyager and Vampire to hunt for the German pocket battleship Admiral Graf Spee in the East Indies" is a bit confusing given that Graf Spee never reached anywhere near the East Indies. The wording should be tweaked to clarify that these were precautionary patrols.
  • I agree that it could be clarified, but remember that the Brits had no idea where Graf Spee was so they really were hunting her.
• Where was her 1929–30 modifications carried out? (Hong Kong or Singapore, I presume)
  • Let me look, although it may not specified in my sources.
• "interbellum" is a bit of an old fashioned and obscure term these days
  • Who says Wiki can't broaden a body's vocabulary? ;-)
• I'm a bit surprised that the British official history by Stephen Roskill hasn't been consulted. Two of its four volumes are online at Hyperwar (about halfway down the page). The Australian official history is also online and is likely to have some useful material on this ship's activities in the East Indies and Med - it's available on the Australian War Memorial's website here
  • Thanks for the sources; I hadn't even really thought about them. Unfortunately only about a hundred pages of each volume of Roskill is actually online, but I'll keep it in mind for other articles.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:31, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Assessment

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

   Please note my comments about 'hunting' the Graf Spee in the East Indies being a bit confusing

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   I've made suggestions for further sources which may be useful in expanding the article

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail: