Talk:HMS Marne (1915)/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Zawed (talk · contribs) 01:13, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
Claiming this one, comments to follow in due course. Zawed (talk) 01:13, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
Lead
- I made one change for grammar, otherwise looks fine.
- Thank you.
Infobox
- Link Marne in the namesake field, otherwise looks fine.
- Linked.
Design and development
- ...in peace tanks that were not used in wartime...: I haven't heard of "peace tanks" before, are these external tanks that would be exposed so vulnerable to damage?
- I think that sounds reasonable, but the sources do not say. Unfortunately there seems to be no data on the difference they made either.
- ...twin mounts for 21 in (533 mm) torpedoes...: write out inch for consistency with other dimensions
- In the literature, it is both in and inch, so I am happy either way. I have made it consistent in the body.
- A single QF 2-pounder 40 mm (1.6 in) "pom-pom": the presentation of the length dimension, metric being first, is inconsistent with all the other dimensions which are imperial first.
- True. The literature seems to call it a 40 mm even in the UK.
- Marne was equipped with two chute,...: should chute be plural?
- Yes. Amended.
Construction and career
- After the battleship King Edward VII had struck a mine on 10 January 1916,...: suggest adding approximate location if it is available, it would add context as to the area of operations.
- Added.
- The gun flashes from the cruiser...: which one, the Castor or one or more of the opposing cruisers?
- Clarified.
- ...a hit from a 4.1 in (100 mm)...: write out inch for consistency with other dimensions
- As above.
Citations
- Note 19: is an end pg range missing or should it be a single page cite?
- Fixed.
- Sources look reliable
- Thank you.
Other stuff
- No dupe links
- Image tag checks out OK
That's it for me, looking in pretty good order. Zawed (talk) 09:20, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- @Zawed: Thank you for an excellent review and your kind comments. I believe all the edits are done. simongraham (talk) 03:43, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
- Happy with the changes and passing as GA as I believe that this article meets the necessary criteria. Zawed (talk) 03:11, 22 January 2023 (UTC)