Talk:Zara-class cruiser (1879)

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

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Zara-class cruiser (1879)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Iazyges (talk · contribs) 15:08, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Will start soon. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 15:08, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • As far as I can see, the article fits the "Immediate Pass" bill; some prose suggestions are offered, but the prose is already understandable, so it is passable. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 18:06, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria[edit]

GA Criteria

GA Criteria:

  • 1
    1.a checkY
    1.b checkY
  • 2
    2.a checkY
    2.b checkY
    2.c checkY
    2.d checkY
  • 3
    3.a checkY
    3.b checkY
  • 4
    4.a checkY
  • 5
    5.a checkY
  • 6
    6.a checkY
    6.b checkY
  • No DAB links checkY
  • No Dead links checkY
  • Images appropriately licensed checkY

Prose Suggestions[edit]

  • "Despite the lengthy design process, the ships proved to be failures in service, primarily the result of their low speed." perhaps "primarily as a result of their low speed" or " primarily because of their low speed"
    • Works for me.
  • " As a result of her different hull, Sebenico is sometimes not included in the Zara class." More of a personal question, but is it mentioned if she is considered her own class, or part of a different class? -- Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 18:12, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Conway's and Greger both list her as a unique type. Thanks for these two reviews, Iazyges. Parsecboy (talk) 18:25, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]