Jump to content

Talk:HMS P222/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Ed! (talk · contribs) 18:39, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Taking a look at this one. —Ed!(talk) 18:39, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]


GA review (see here for criteria) (see here for this contributor's history of GA reviews)
  1. It is reasonably well written:
    Dab links, dup links, external links tools all show no problems. Copyvio detector shows green.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable:
    Pass Offline references accepted in good faith. Cursory check of Google Books shows references that back up source material here.
  3. It is broad in its coverage:
    Not Yet
    • Is there a date for the caption of the lead image?
    • Design and description: Might be good to start the section of explaining what the S class was, role and/or if this was a line of similar type ships or an outlier, as jumping in to talk about batches starts it off a bit disjointed.
    • "Though the boat did not encounter enemy forces, the convoy operation was largely successful" -- This seems to imply the patrol have been unsuccessful unless it was attacked? Not entirely clear on phrasing.
    • Re:sinking: Were there any efforts to search for her worth mentioning?
    • "Her wreck was claimed to have been found off Cape Negro, Tunisia, by a Belgian amateur diver, but there has been no confirmation of the finding.[7]" -- What year was this? Any efforts to verify the wreckage?
  1. It follows the neutral point of view policy:
    • Have generally discouraged the use of the term "enemy" in articles, in favor of more neutral explanation of OpFor in question, in this case Axis/Nazi German/Italian ships. Thoughts?
  1. It is stable:
    Pass No problems there.
  2. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate:
    Pass Two images tagged PD where appropriate.
  3. Other:
    On Hold Nothing major, but a few points to address before passing GAN. —Ed!(talk) 18:58, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. Nothing significant enough to hold further. Passing GA. —Ed!(talk) 21:54, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]