Jump to content

Talk:HMS Stork (1916)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


This review is transcluded from Talk:HMS Stork (1916)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: PizzaKing13 (talk · contribs) 17:54, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll go ahead and review this article. PizzaKing13 (Hablame) 17:54, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

[edit]
  • lowercase "broken up" PizzaKing13 (Hablame) 18:01, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Does it matter if the length listed is between perpendiculars or overall, or both?
    • It now has both for completeness.
  • The infobox states the draught is "8 ft 5 in" while the body states it is "8 ft 6 in". Which is correct?
    • Probably both and different points in the hull, but the mean is 9 ft according to the source. Amended.

Lead

[edit]
  • Hyphenate "R class" in the second sentence
    • Done.
  • Same for "M class"
    • Done.
  • Insert a comma after "torpedo boats"
    • Done.
  • Start a new paragraph at "After the armistice that ended the war"
    • Done.
  • Remove "However"
    • Done.

Design and development

[edit]
Paragraph 1
  • Hyphenate "M class"
    • Done.
Paragraph 2
  • Comments about the measurements themselves are in the infobox commentary section
    • I have revisited the numbers in this paragraph and ensured that they are consistent with the sources.
  • Lowercase "Displacement" and add "Its" before it
    • Amended.
Paragraph 3

Construction and career

[edit]
Paragraph 1
  • All good
Paragraph 2
  • Add a comma between "hits were reported" and "but the German"
    • Done.
  • Add a comma between "sunk by Sylph" and "and SS Cito"
    • Done.
Paragraph 3
  • All good
Paragraph 4
  • All good
Paragraph 5

Pennant numbers

[edit]
  • All good

References and sources

[edit]
  • All sources are appropriate and are all used
  • Since they have page numbers attached to them, is it possible to move "Dunkirk War Memorial: Naval Arrangements", "Allied Dead at Ostend: Monument Unveiled", "News in Brief", and "Shore Defence Practice on the Thames" into the bibliography section, as the article by Naval Staff Monographs already is?
    • My reasoning is that the items are only a page long, as the sections in The Navy List are.
  • Change "pp" (pages) to "p" (page) in reference 5 (Naval Staff Monograph No. 35 1939, pp. 13.)
    • Done.
  • Navbar and categories are good PizzaKing13 (Hablame) 18:22, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Images

[edit]

Overall

[edit]

Final remarks

[edit]
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

@Simongraham: Very good job! Just some grammar checks and some questions about the material and I'll go ahead and pass this article. PizzaKing13 (Hablame) 18:25, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PizzaKing13: Thank you for such a thorough review and your kind comments. Please see my comments above and tell me if I missed anything. simongraham (talk) 12:52, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Simongraham: Everything has been addressed. Congrats! I'll now pass this article. PizzaKing13 (Hablame) 20:18, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.