Talk:Brazilian monitor Pará

Brazilian monitor Pará 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.

Brazilian monitor Pará is part of the Pará class monitors series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
October 11, 2010	Good article nominee	Listed
December 12, 2010	Good topic candidate	Promoted

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on September 4, 2010.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the Brazilian river monitor Pará was so badly damaged after passing the Paraguayan fort at Humaitá on 23 February 1868 that she had to be beached to prevent her from sinking?

Current status: Good article

Military history: Maritime / South America

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
	South American military history 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[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Brazilian monitor Pará/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Skinny87 (talk) 07:51, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
'The monitor had to be beached after passing the fortress to prevent her from sinking.' - What damage was inflicted to her to require this?
Not specified. Tamandare took over 120 hits so I expect that it was damage from the Paraguayan guns.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:55, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

I've got a single question for you to answer, and then I can pass this baby. Skinny87 (talk) 07:51, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]