Talk:Italian cruiser Pisa

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Italian cruiser Pisa/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Caponer (talk · contribs) 14:18, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Sturmvogel 66, I will complete a thorough and comprehensive review of this article within the next 48 hours. Please let me know if you have any questions, comments, or concerns regarding this review in the meantime. Thanks again! -- Caponer (talk) 14:18, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

---

Sturmvogel 66, I have completed my thorough review and re-review of this article, and I find that it easily meets the bulk of criteria for passage to Good Article status. Before its passage, I do have some comments and questions that must first be addressed. Great job on this article. -- Caponer (talk) 15:31, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.

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

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Lede

• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section, the lede of this article adequately defines the cruiser, establishes the necessary context for the cruiser, and explains why the cruiser is notable.
• I suggest adding in more content regarding the cruiser's design, perhaps briefly mentioning the make up of its primary and secondary armament. That way the "Design and description" section is better represented thus making the lede more comprehensive.
  • It's impossible to summarize the data in the design paragraph; all you can do is repeat portions of it, which strikes me as pointlessly redundant.
• The Bundesarchiv, Bild 102-13142 image is released into the public domain and is licensed CC BY-SA 3.0 de, therefore it is acceptable for use here.
• The template is beautifully formatted and its content is soured in the references listed below.
• The lede is well-written, consists of content that is adequately sourced and verifiable, and I have no other comments or questions for this section.

Design and description

• Per Wikipedia:Inline citation, inline citations should be consolidated at the end of the sentences and paragraphs in numerical order. This is merely a recommendation, however.
  • Be advised that I add cites whenever I change sources, most of the time that will be at the end of a sentence, but occasionally not.
• The image of Pisa '​s aft superstructure and gun turrets at Tripoli is released into the public domain and is therefore acceptable for use here.
• This section is well-written, consists of content that is adequately sourced and verifiable, and I have no other comments or questions for this section.

Construction and career

• The image of Pisa off the Libyan city of Derna in October 1912 is released into the public domain and is free to use here.
• As mentioned above, per Wikipedia:Inline citation, inline citations should be consolidated at the end of the sentences and paragraphs in numerical order. This is merely a recommendation, however.
• The Italo-Turkish War should be wiki-linked in this section as it is the first usage of the term in the article's main prose outside the lede.
  • I give the reader a little credit in short articles like this one, so I don't link terms if I've done so in the lede.
• I would also wiki-link Tripoli, Tobruk, and Derna in this section, as they are each the first mentions of the place names within the article's main prose outside the lede.
• Ottoman Navy should be wiki-linked in the lede and in this section when referring to its participation against Italy in the Italo-Turkish War.
  • Done.
• Add comma after "On 1 July 1921" in the final paragraph. And I suggest adding a comma after "From 1925 to 1930."
  • Done.
• Durrës and the Battle of Durazzo (1918) should be wiki-linked in the final paragraph of this section.
• The image of Pisa steaming at low speed in calm water, 15 May 1925, is released into the public domain and is therefore acceptable for use here.
• This section is well-written, consists of content that is adequately sourced and verifiable, and I have no other comments or questions for this section.
  • Thanks for your review. I trust you will understand why I've not followed some of your requests.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:21, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
    • Sturmvogel 66, it was a privilege and a pleasure to review this article. Thank you for addressing my questions and concerns in a timely manner. I completely understand why you haven't followed some of my requests, but they were merely suggestions and I think you for at least acknowledging them. I hereby pass this article to Good Article status. Congratulations on a job well done! -- Caponer (talk) 16:26, 22 February 2015 (UTC)