Talk:USS Milwaukee (CL-5)/GA1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Ed! (talk · contribs) 13:50, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Ah! This had been an article I hoped to improve, but you beat me to it. Better step up my game. —Ed!(talk) 13:50, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome to the rest of the class, but I needed this one for my Soviet cruisers of WW2 topic.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:12, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
  • The lead should note some of her scientific equipment, since it is mentioned repeatedly in the service history.
  • "The gun turrets were only protected against blast... " -- This needs to be clarified, in this context I don't understand the sentence.
  • You alternate a few times between using the "USS" prefix on other ships mentioned. It should be standardized.
  • "Milwaukee, commanded by Captain Forrest B. Royal, was beinging overhauled in the Brooklyn Navy Yard on 7 December." -- Two problems: I cant tell if you meant to say "being overhauled" or "beginning overhaul" and also you'll need to specify the significance of 7 December as the day the U.S. joined the war.
  • "Milwaukee found the freighter abandoned," -- I believe you need to note the 25 crew that were later rescued were from lifeboats or in the sea of the ship was abandoned.
  • "prepatory to her temporary transfer to the Soviet Union in lieu of Italian ships allotted after the Italian surrender that could not be delivered." -- Is there any ship she was supposed to be replacing? Or what is the reason for the Italian ships not being delivered?
  • "She escorted a convoy to Belfast, Northern Ireland on 8 March before escorting Convoy JW-58 to Murmansk beginning on 29 March." -- I think Murmansk has been improperly italicized here.
  • Dab link tool shows one disambiguation to fix: Westinghouse.
  • External links tool shows one dead link that needs to be replaced.
  • Dup link tool shows no problems. Article is illustrated by two images with appropriate lisencing. There are no apparent problems with neutrality or stability.
Will await your replies. —Ed!(talk) 18:20, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
All done, let me know if anything requires further clarification. Thanks for the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:29, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Good work. Passing the GA. —Ed!(talk) 21:39, 13 January 2013 (UTC)