Talk:SMS Kaiser Karl VI

SMS Kaiser Karl VI 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.
Review: September 11, 2014. (Reviewed version).

Military history: Maritime / World War I

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
	World War I 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:SMS Kaiser Karl VI/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: MisterBee1966 (talk · contribs) 09:48, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

starting shortly

is the use of template {{Infobox ship class overview}} intentional? Is {{Infobox ship career}} not a better choice? MisterBee1966 (talk) 09:48, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Good point - substituted.
was the namesake Charles VI, Holy Roman Emperor?
- Also a good suggestion - added. Parsecboy (talk) 17:39, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
check overlinking of Rear Admiral in "Service history" section
- Good catch, fixed. Parsecboy (talk) 12:44, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. Has an appropriate reference section:

B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

GA toolbox
Reviewing
Templates Criteria Instructions