Talk:Richelieu-class battleship/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Peacemaker67 (talk · contribs) 08:42, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This article is in pretty good shape. I have some comments:

in the first sentence, suggest "The Richelieu class were fast battleships built"
- Sounds good
comma after Clemenceau
- Good catch
link Richelieu and Jean Bart in the lead
- Done
suggest "French African colonies ~~turned over~~shifted"
- Works for me
suggest adding |Total ships scrapped=2 to the infobox
- Good idea
the infobox says in service until 1967, but shouldn't it read 1970 for Jean Bart?
- Fixed
put adj=on for "two 35,000 long tons" to drop the s
- Fixed
"from three to two shortened considerably" is this missing an "and"?
- Must have gotten distracted while writing that
when "laid down" is first mentioning in the body, link keel laying
- Done
suggest adding o/a to the infobox length
- Done
"to be shorted" shortened?
- Fixed
"housed a pair of catapults"
- Fixed
suggest link=on in the infobox for the power to link kW
- Done
were they all designed to have Indret boilers? The infobox says so, but the body seems to contradict this? Perhaps Sural?
- Removed the manufacturer from the box
suggest "Next astern was a second boiler room, followed by a second engine room" and later drop the #2 and use second, alternatively use No. 1 and No. 2
- Done
suggest "~~both of~~ which were placed in a superfiring pair forward of the superstructure" as "both of" is redundant
- Removed
if neither Richelieu or Jean Bart were ever fitted with the amidships secondary turrets, then they shouldn't be included "as built", some rewording of this is needed
- Good point
hyphenate "time-fused"
- Done
the body says 24 13.2 mm guns, the infobox says 20?
- Fixed
link Director (military)
- Done
funnel is redlinked?
- Fixed
secondary battery)
- Fixed
the infobox and body belt measurements don't match
- Good catch - Jordan & Dumas kept referring to it as 330mm and then on the pages specifically on the armor layout, they were more specific
"and with armor on the same scale"
- Done
19 Mach 1938
- Who's to say they didn't submit the variants at Mach 1,938?
"The number of triple 152 mm" turrets?
- Fixed
suggest specifying belt in the Clemenceau infobox
- Good catch
in general under Clemenceau specifications, make it clear that Clemenceau wasn't built, so these were planned rather than actual. Same for Gascogne specifications.
- Good idea
"Two superfired over the forward main battery turret"
- Done
"Full load displacement was reduced slightly" plus needs a full stop
- Good catch
replace l'État français and la France libre in the table with Vichy France and Free France as the French is unnecessary and potentially confusing
- I hadn't looked at the table too closely, apparently - the article was a mess before I chopped it by more than half
full stop after Crimson
- Fixed
"Engines were installed With German forces"?
- Must've forgotten what I was doing halfway through ;)
"including one wit as many"
- Fixed
" rendered in an unrealistic project" it?
- Good catch
is there a source page for File:Richelieu class battleships inboard profile EN.svg?
- Added
same for File:Richelieu class battleships power plant.svg
- Added
is there a source for File:Turret Richelieu.svg and File:Richelieu class battleships frame 167 35 aft.svg?
- Added
suggest cropping File:The Royal Navy during the Second World War A23483.jpg to make it square or rectangular
- I'll get to this shortly
  - Cropped version uploaded and switched out.
I'm not seeing the Dutch CC0 1.0 dedication for File:French battleship Jean Bart in the Suez Canal.jpg?
- It's here - the statement at the top says if there's a download link, they're free to use (and then further down, it says the archives waives its rights to files with the CC0 marker, which this one has).
Per Earwig, no copyvio issues

That's all I have. Great job on this. Placing on hold for the above to be addressed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:54, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks PM, I think I got everything. Parsecboy (talk) 13:31, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No prob. This article is well-written, verifiable using reliable sources, covers the subject well, is neutral and stable, contains no plagiarism, and is illustrated by appropriately licensed images with appropriate captions. Passing. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:12, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]