Jump to content

Talk:Soviet destroyer Strogy (1939)/GA1

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

GA Review

[edit]

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

Reviewer: Ed! (talk · contribs) 03:00, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Taking a look. —Ed!(talk) 03:00, 14 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:
    Dup links, dab links and external links tools all show no problems. Copyvio tool returns 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
    • "Strogy and several of her sisters were rebuilt as Project 32 rescue and decontamination ships" -- Might be worth it to mention which ones were converted. Was there ever a purpose-built class for this purpose?
    • "she received two direct hits from an artillery battery on 26 November, killing one and wounding two sailors." -- Any indication of ship damage as well?
    • "expended 1167 and 979 130 mm shells in 1942 and 1943, respectively. ... She expended a total of 4,669 shells..." -- consistency needed in the article as to commas or none in larger figures.
    • Modifications indicates believed obsolescence but might be good to add in Postwar service where it can be chronological. If possible, might be good to indicate what advances/classes supplanted this one.
  1. It follows the neutral point of view policy:
    Pass Multiple references given an appropriate balance between them.
  2. It is stable:
    Pass No problems there.
  3. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate:
    Pass One image tagged PD where appropriate.
  4. Other:
    On Hold Pending a few minor things. —Ed!(talk) 03:57, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pass Thanks as always! —Ed!(talk) 00:31, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]