Talk:Vettor Pisani-class cruiser

Vettor Pisani-class cruiser 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.
Review: February 16, 2015. (Reviewed version).

Ships

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, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles

Military history: Maritime / European / Italian / World War I

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.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	European military history task force
	Italian military history task force (c. 500–present)
	World War I task force

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Ceradon (talk · contribs) 17:52, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In the vein of you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours, I'll take this on. Full review should be done a day or two. --ceradon (talk • contribs) 17:52, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
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):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
Excellent work here. Would be happy to pass.

Passing... --ceradon (talk • contribs) 16:12, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

"Single 40-caliber QF Cannone da 120/40 A Modello 1891 gun was" - please correct the linguistic plurality in this sentence (first sentence in the penultimate paragraph). "A single 40-caliber QF Cannone da 120/40 A Modello 1891 gun was" or "Single 40-caliber QF Cannone da 120/40 A Modello 1891 guns were".
"She subsequently became a repair ship in 1916" - Are you talking about Giuseppe Garibaldi or Vettor Pisani? I think the antecedent to the "She" pronoun is the Giuseppe Garibaldi, rather than Vettor Pisani. Could probably say "Vettor Pisani subsequently became".
Robinson 1903 needs a title. Did you intend for the journal parameter to be the title parameter?
- If you click on the help link you'll see that the journal parameter is supposed to act as the title, but only a few days ago, these redlinks started popping up incorrectly. I suspect that somebody started messing around with the template and it hasn't been fixed yet. Nothing I can do about anyways.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:32, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No disambiguation links found in the article.
Images are in the public domain and properly tagged.
- Thanks for your review; I've fixed everything you identified.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:32, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]