Talk:Soviet cruiser Molotov

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Soviet cruiser Molotov has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Good topic star Soviet cruiser Molotov is part of the Kirov class cruisers series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Military history (Rated GA-Class)
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality assessment scale.
WikiProject Ships (Rated GA-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions. WikiProject icon
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject Russia / Technology & engineering / History / Military (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia.
To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the technology and engineering in Russia task force.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the history of Russia task force.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Russian, Soviet, and CIS military history task force.
 
WikiProject Soviet Union (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Soviet cruiser Molotov/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Kevin Murray (talk) 03:47, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Questions/Comments:

  1. I woould split the lead into two paragraphs at: She was extensively modernized.
    Done
  2. Can you find an alternative to "She was" for beginning sentences?
    Done
  3. The photo seems weak and there is a fairly clear photo at: File:Molotov-1.jpg. Why would you not use that?
    Done
  4. The first sentence of the Description section seems a bit long. Irt conveys the message, but I might reorder it for better flow. That's not always easy.
    How does it read now.
  5. There is too much going on in the first paragraph too. I'd break it into a couple of paragraphs. I assume that there is not enough information to expand this into several sections. There isn't much ore to this paragraph than could be handled in a chart.
    Done
  6. It would be nice to know what the improvements were from the Proj. 26 to Proj. 26b, and how the 26 series evolved from prior designs and why. Were they successful in their objective? How did they compare to international contemporaries?
    Most of that material is covered in the class article.
  7. Why were the 47mm guns swapped for 37mm?
    They were fully automatic, the 45 mm guns were only semi-automatic.
  8. "She landed her catapult" becomes clear in the context of the paragraph, but seems like unnecessary jargon, that distracts the reader from the flow -- why not use standard words like "removed"
    Done
  9. might talk a bit more about the radar. Being the only ship in the navy with it seems pertinent
    Don't know much more about it. It's function is the most important thing anyways.
  10. In both the WWII and Postwar sections, there is no continuity to the paragraphs. They seem to flow like a timeline with random breaks. I know that this isn't easy, but is there a way to make the prose something more than a string of dates and facts? I don't think that this is a bad article, but how can you grab the reader's interest and bring some continuity to the story?
    Don't have much of the interstitial information that would be needed to make it flow more smoothly. You're welcome to make a stab at it yourself.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:23, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. 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:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

I think this has met the standards for GA acceptance. It is about as good as it can get without more information, which is likely dificult to obtain. Not everything that I suggested could be done, but those suggestions far exceeded the GA requirements. --Kevin Murray (talk) 19:24, 23 September 2010 (UTC)