Talk:HMS Carnarvon/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: AustralianRupert (talk · contribs) 23:27, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose: clarity, conciseness, grammar and spelling, copyright): b (MoS: lead, layout, W2W, fiction and list):

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
a (fair representation): b (all significant views):

It is stable.
No edit wars etc.:

It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
a (tagged and captioned): b (Is illustrated with appropriate images): c (non-free images have fair use rationales): d public domain pictures appropriately demonstrate why they are public domain:

Overall:
a Pass/Fail:

Comments

G'day, this article looks like it is in good shape. Well done and thanks for your efforts so far. I have a few suggestions to discuss before promotion to GA: AustralianRupert (talk) 23:27, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

in the lead, "Devonshire-class armoured cruisers" probably needs italics for Devonshire;
there appears to be a discrepancy regarding the date of completion. In the infobox it says 29 May 1905, but in the body it says 25 May 1905;
in the design section, "three quick-firing (QF) 3-pounder Hotchkiss guns", but in the infox "18 x single QF 3-pounder Hotchkiss guns"
in the design section, "The ship's waterline armour belt had a maximum thickness of six inches" --> should mention be made here that it ranged between 2 and 6 inches, as this is mentioned in the infobox?
spelling "fleet maneuvers" --> "fleet manoeuvres";
"On 31 July, a few days before war was declared on Germany, she encountered the German light cruiser Strassburg returning home." Not sure, but this seems to beg a couple of questions: (1) where did this take place? and (2) what happened? I assume nothing, but maybe it could be stated...
"and to begin the search for the East Asia Squadron the day after" --> is it possible to add a bit more context about the East Asia Squadron here? For example, maybe on first mention it could be presented as the "German East Asia Squadron", and then it could be stated what they were thought to be doing in the area. For instance, "and to begin the search for the German East Asia Squadron, which was believed to be traversing the area, the day after..." or something similar;
- German East Asia Squadron is linked and spelled out in the lede.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:39, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"The German captain started to scuttle his ship 10 minutes earlier" --> "The German captain had started to scuttle his ship 10 minutes earlier..."
"his ship slowly sank at 18:00" --> suggest tweaking this: either "his ship slowly began to sink at 18:00" or "his ship sank at 18:00" would work;
"the U.K. en route" -->"the United Kingdom en route"?
"In 1919 she served as a cadet training ship until she was listed for sale in March 1921". Perhaps this might be smoother/clearer: "In 1919 she began serving as a cadet training ship, remaining in that role until she was listed for sale in March 1921"?
the duplicate link checker reports one repeated link: HMNB Devonport;
in the Bibliography, but not specifically cited: Corbett (x 2), perhaps add citations to these?
in the Bibliography, Corbett Naval Operations to the Battle of the Falklands seems inconsistently presented when compared with the other entries as it appears to be missing a year of publication. AustralianRupert (talk) 23:27, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Copyedited (but thanks for catching things I missed, AR). - Dank (push to talk) 00:24, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your review. I think that I've addressed all of your comment, see if they suit.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:39, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, your changes look good. I am happy that the article meets the GA criteria. Well done. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 18:55, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]