Talk:HMS King George V (41)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: WikiCopter (♠ • ♣ • ♥ • ♦ • simple • commons • lost • cvu • onau) 21:43, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

See also section is unused, except for interwiki and portal box. WikiCopter (♠ • ♣ • ♥ • ♦ • simple • commons • lost • cvu • onau) 21:43, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Deleted Thurgate (talk) 22:27, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Refit section table needs more info on the locations. WikiCopter (♠ • ♣ • ♥ • ♦ • simple • commons • lost • cvu • onau) 21:44, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- In my sources, I can find no mention of location (not including the two locations that my books provided) Thurgate (talk) 22:56, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - I would suggest you look through other sources, especially as you only have 3 book sources.
Section Action with Bismarck needs a main article template to the battle page. WikiCopter (♠ • ♣ • ♥ • ♦ • simple • commons • lost • cvu • onau) 21:45, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed Thurgate (talk) 22:29, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This article has many grammatical errors, I fixed one, but there are still many errors. Can I ask for consistency and correction of caps? WikiCopter (♠ • ♣ • ♥ • ♦ • simple • commons • lost • cvu • onau) 21:47, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- My terrible grammar skills strike again. I'll go over the article again and correct my mishaps! Thurgate (talk) 22:32, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I've changed all of the mistakes I can see, but my grammar is pretty iffy, so I have probably not caught everything. Thurgate (talk) 23:23, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Goto the guild. WikiCopter (♠ • ♣ • ♥ • ♦ • simple • commons • lost • cvu • onau) 01:14, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - AustralianRupert has just done a lot of copy-editing on the article, are you now happy with it or do you think I should still send it to the guild? Thurgate (talk) 16:07, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      - Congrats to AR, you're good. WikiCopter (♠ • ♣ • ♥ • ♦ • simple • commons • lost • cvu • onau) 23:40, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Source comments:
- Greenwich, not Greenwhich, correct?
  - Fixed by AustralianRupert
- Sort the sources alphabetically.
  - Fixed by AustralianRupert
- I would not support Uboat.net as a reliable source. Could you change it out or support it with another? WikiCopter (♠ • ♣ • ♥ • ♦ • simple • commons • lost • cvu • onau) 01:14, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Deleted it as the information wasn't massively useful. Thurgate (talk) 16:07, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I would suggest acquireing more sources before moving up the ladder; I have quite a few at my library and I might help you get it to A (if you wish). WikiCopter (♠ • ♣ • ♥ • ♦ • simple • commons • lost • cvu • onau) 23:38, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - That would be most appreciated as my library is a bit thin at the moment. Also to be honest, at the moment I'm just trying to get all of the King George V battleship class up to a GA and then ill go from their. Thurgate (talk) 23:49, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Expand section Construction or merge with section Design. WikiCopter (♠ • ♣ • ♥ • ♦ • simple • commons • lost • cvu • onau) 23:38, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed - I've merged it with the Design section as per your suggestion. Thurgate (talk) 23:44, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Overall more links would be appreciated, especially in the body. WikiCopter (♠ • ♣ • ♥ • ♦ • simple • commons • lost • cvu • onau) 23:40, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Wiki-links? Thurgate (talk) 23:42, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - I've added the links as per your suggestion, do you want more links or do you think the amount at the moment will suffice? Thurgate (talk) 00:02, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - Pretty good. I'll pass, on the condition you'll allow me to help you with the rest. (WikiCup points are nice, especially when you're competing) :P WikiCopter (♠ • ♣ • ♥ • ♦ • simple • commons • lost • cvu • onau) 04:10, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      - That would be sweet, as I need all the help I can get :D. Thanks for reviewing the article and I look forward to working with you! Thurgate (talk) 12:52, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]