Talk:Action off Lofoten/GA1
I'll review this article later today. As a disclaimer, I've made a couple of minor edits to this article in the past (mainly copyediting and adding a map). Reviewer: Nick-D (talk) 00:24, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- The German capital ships are called both battleships and battlecruisers - pick one (the article on the ships uses, after much discussion, 'battleship' so that would probably be the best choice).
- The names of the British destroyers should be linked
- Why did 'poor weather conditions' delay the battle? (it might also be worth explaining just how bad the conditions were as these had an importance influence on the battle)
- Why did the action cease for 20 minutes at 6 am?
- "Despite the fact that the destroyers' fire was out of range, the Germans mistook Whitworth's smaller vessels for much more powerful ships and thought they were heavily out gunned" - the first half of this sentence doesn't match up with the second half (the use of 'despite' is confusing)
- "Despite the Royal Navy winning a minor tactical victory over the Kriegsmarine, the Germans considered the engagement a success." - this seems contradictory: if the Germans considered the action to be successful, why was it a RN victory?
- Strategically the Germans were victorious because they prevented whitworths squadron from interfering with the initial German landings. Tactically the Royal navy won because the German squadron was worse off in terms of damage and they forced the German squadron to flee to the open sea from an arguablely inferior force.XavierGreen (talk) 21:08, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
- "After the action had ended, Whitworth's force continued to search for the German capital ships. With Whitworth's force occupied" - this is a bit repetitive
- The coverage of the battle and its aftermath is rather brief - can more be said on this? The British official histories might have additional material, for instance.
- Can photos of the ships involved be added?
Assessment against GA criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- 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?
- Pass or Fail: