Talk:HMS Mosquito (1910)

HMS Mosquito (1910) 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: January 16, 2024. (Reviewed version).

Military history: Maritime / British / European / 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
	British military history task force
	European 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:HMS Mosquito (1910)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Zawed (talk · contribs) 22:36, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will review, comments to follow in due course. Zawed (talk) 22:36, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

No issues identified

Design and Development

This also reduced costs, : "also" is used later in this sentence, suggest deleting the quoted instance
- Deleted.
The mention of G class at the end of the first paragraph should be hypenated for consistency with the lead
- The format depends on whether it is a noun (no hyphen) or adjective (hyphen).
length, beam and draught dimensions inconsistent with infobox, ditto installed power
- Good spot. Amended.
the text also refers to "three 3 in (76 mm) QF 12-pounder 12 cwt guns" but the "3 in" is missing from the infobox
- Added.

Construction and career

No mention of commissioning although this is stated in the infobox as being in August 1910
- Oops. Amended.
in the Beagle's forming the: this threw me initially, but I think you mean the class of Beagles? Suggest revising this to make it clearer
- Fixed.
Mosquito left Plymouth: no antedence for Plymouth
- Clarified.
Second Division of the Fifth Flotilla and based in Alexandria: "Fifth Destroyer Flotilla"?
- Added.

Bibliography/Source checks

"Volume" is inconsistently presented in the two Corbett refs
- Corrected, along with the publisher name.
There is an errant ampersand in Note 11. Ditto Note 42
- Removed.
Dittmar listed but doesn't seem cited. Same for Moore, Same for Parkes
- Removed Moore and added statements from Dittmar & Colledge and Parkes & Prendergast
The link for Monograph No. 4 doesn't work
- Fixed.
Checking Note 24, this doesn't say that Mosquito was one of the three destroyers sent to the southern end of the Straits of Messina
- Amended to relevant service.
Notes 10, 26 and 27 check out OK

Other stuff

One dupe link: Fairfield Shipbuilding and Engineering Company
- Removed.
Image tag OK

Spotted a few obvious typos as I went along and corrected these, otherwise that's it for me. Zawed (talk) 11:44, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Zawed: Thank you for such an excellent review. I have made the changes. simongraham (talk) 07:58, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This looks all good so am passing as GA as I believe the article meets the necessary criteria. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 03:21, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]