Talk:Alexander von Monts

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Alexander von Monts/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Zawed (talk · contribs) 09:57, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

I'll take this one, comments to follow over next few days. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 09:57, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Zawed! Parsecboy (talk) 19:04, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Apologies for taking so long to get to this. Anyway, my comments follows:

I'll see your delayed review with a delayed response ;)

Early life

• He served on Royal Navy ships for a time, presumably on secondment? Was there some sort of relationship between the Prussian and British navies? It may pay to include a brief explanation for context.
  • That I don't know - there must have been some kind of officer training relationship at the time, as I've seen the same details mentioned in other bios of Prussian naval officers of the era, but I haven't seen anything that explained actually what it was. I'd have expected Sondhaus to have mentioned it, but he didn't (that I've seen, in any case).

Grosser Kurfürst sinking

• The first sentence of the 2nd paragraph is quite long and could do with breaking up.
  • Good idea - take a look at how I've reworked it.

Later career

• "In January 1884, Caprivi, another army officer,...": I wasn't sure of the context for the "another"?
  • Stosch was an army officer - clarified that in the Grosser Kurfurst section
• He seems to have died relatively young, any guff on cause of death?
  • Nothing I've seen in the sources - I'd guess cancer or something, but I don't know
• I suggest breaking the paragraph discussing his death into two, perhaps at "He died..."
  • Works for me.

Notes/References

• Note 21 needs some identifying text, presumably Die Toten der Woche?
  • Good catch.
• The ISBN number for Zabecki needs dashes for consistency with other refs
  • Done

Other stuff

• No dupe links
• No dabs
• External links check out OK.
• The image tags appear OK, but the painting of Sjælland may warrant a closer look if you go to A-Class with this article.
  • You might be right on that - we might need a date the painting was made available to the public. It might be better to replace it with File:Willy Stöwer - Seegefecht bei Jasmund.jpg, since that does have a pre-1923 publication date.

Generally looking good with only minor content issues requiring attention. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 10:40, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks again, Zawed. Parsecboy (talk) 20:49, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Review summary

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

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 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):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Your changes look good, passing this one as a GA. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 23:31, 29 June 2018 (UTC)