Talk:Battle of the Strait of Otranto (1917)/GA1

GA Review

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

GA review of this version:

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   • In the "Disposition" section, first paragraph, the sentence beginning A supporting force composed of… is a sentence fragment
   • There are a lot of customary units (miles, inches, etc.) that should be converted.

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):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Just the one prose issue and the unit conversions keep it from passing. One suggestion that might be helpful for A-Class or higher assessment might be a "Background" section that gives a little more context for the Otranto Barrage. The lead does a nice job summarizing it, but about a paragraph more would help. Also, you might look into Paul G. Halpern's book The Battle of the Otranto Straits: Controlling the Gateway to the Adriatic in World War I, which focuses specifically on this battle. Also, the publisher's website calls it the "largest naval engagement in the Mediterranean" (not just the Adriatic). — Bellhalla (talk) 03:41, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your review! Yeah, I think you're right about adding a background section. That might have to wait until I can get my hands on Halpern's book (it's been on my Amazon wishlist for some time now :) I fixed the run-on sentence you found, and converted the standard units I could find. Is there anything else? Thanks again. Parsecboy (talk) 12:01, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

All looks good, so I'm passing it. The only other issue I can see of is perhaps the name of the article. When I did a google search on the current name (less "wikipedia") it comes up with 2 hits (one of which is a WP mirror). A search (again, less "wikipedia") on the name used in the title of Halpern's book, Battle of the Otranto Straits, comes up with about 1,610 hits, but most seem to be connected to the book.

Also, at the IU Press link (above) the book was under $8.00 (and new, no less!) as of last night when I looked. — Bellhalla (talk) 14:27, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I had considered the name when I started the article, but I chose the current one so that it would match the format of Battle of the Strait of Otranto (1940). I wouldn't be opposed to renaming it though, since it does seem to be much more widely used.

Maybe I'll just get the book for myself :) Parsecboy (talk) 14:36, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I hadn't thought about the 1940 battle in the results. But, then again, there is only one non-WP-mirror link for either battle under the current name... — Bellhalla (talk) 15:32, 24 April 2009 (UTC)