Jump to content

Talk:Tosa-class battleship/GA1

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

GA Review

[edit]

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

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
    • Add some context for what Amagi is; right now the article assumes the reader knows about that ship
    • Same goes for Akagi (which also should have a wikilink)
    • There's inconsistent specification of tons in the article. The first part uses "ton" (without conversion) + one that was identifiable as long tons with a conversion to tonnes; The latter part uses only tonnes. All non-duplicated figures should have conversions.
    • There were a couple of typos where the class and the lead ship were referred to as Toga rather than Tosa. (If I was wrong to correct those please restore them.)
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  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, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
    • I have no problem with the fair-use rationale for the line drawing, but others that take a more hard-line stance might take exception to the "no free alternative can be created"
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Overall a nice article. The inconsistency with the (long?) tons/tonnes is my biggest concern. Should be easy to resolve. — Bellhalla (talk) 19:08, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Everything looks good, so I'm passing. Good job, guys! — Bellhalla (talk) 19:08, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]