Talk:SMS Baden/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 06:31, 18 May 2010 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria[reply]

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:
Break-up the sequence of Baden... Baden... Baden... in the Scapa Flow section.
Fixed. Parsecboy (talk) 11:19, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

B. MoS compliance:
Use the chapter= for the Baden article title in Warship
Added. Parsecboy (talk) 11:19, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It was still messed up; ya gotta think of a volume of Warship as an anthology of articles, each with their own author and title. Fixed it for you regardless.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 06:55, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:
I've added a clarification note on the beginning of the mutiny. Did the ships sail or not?
Should be more clear now. Let me know if there's anything else I could add. Parsecboy (talk) 11:19, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail: