Jump to content

Talk:Agordat-class cruiser

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleAgordat-class cruiser 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.
Good topic starAgordat-class cruiser is part of the Torpedo cruisers of Italy 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
DateProcessResult
November 24, 2014Good article nomineeListed
August 6, 2019Good topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Good article

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:Agordat-class cruiser/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Peacemaker67 (talk · contribs) 05:54, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well-written:
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
  • minelayer and gunboat are overlinked
    • Fixed - guess I forgot to run the dupe link tool
  • suggest adding a note re: calibre (eg L/50)
    • Added
  • do we know where her torpedo tubes were mounted?
    • Unfortuantely no - details on these cruisers are a bit sparse (the Italian protected cruisers in general)
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. No images
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. No images
7. Overall assessment. Good work! Just a couple of queries to resolve. Passing.