Talk:Chinese frigate Yuyuen/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · contribs) 00:14, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Will come back shortly. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 00:14, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

• Section 1;
  • Mention "ihp" in full on the first mention.

• Done. Miyagawa (talk) 00:29, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

• • Consistency maintained, all the parameters—Displacement, Length, Beam, Draft, Power, Propulsion, Speed, Armament and armor—seem fine. Conversion templates and links in right place.
• Section 2;
  • The construction cost of the two ships went over budget; is a duplicate, this was already mentioned.

• I've rephrased - I thought it was worthwhile linking the budget issues to the initial usage of the ship. Miyagawa (talk) 00:29, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

• • some 19 months -> 19 months

• Corrected. Miyagawa (talk) 00:29, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

• • Is the rank of "Chin Yung-chai" available?

• Added. Miyagawa (talk) 00:29, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

• • had any experience with any sea training; the second "any" is not necessary

• Removed. Miyagawa (talk) 00:29, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

• Section 2.1;
  • V-formation -> V-shaped formation

• Altered as suggested. Miyagawa (talk) 00:29, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

• • 10pm -> 10:00 pm per MOS:TIME, the space between 10:00 and "pm" must be nbsp

• Done. Miyagawa (talk) 00:29, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

• • 4am -> 4:00 pm

• Done. Miyagawa (talk) 00:29, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

• • L.C. Arlington -> L. C. Arlington, per MOS:POSTNOM

• Done. Miyagawa (talk) 00:29, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

• • An attempt was later made to raise the Yuyuen, is it successful or not, mention that.

• I've modified the sentence to make it clear it was unsuccessful. At least that's my interpretation of the source, since it states that attempts were made but I've not seen anything in any sources that indicate that this was a success. Miyagawa (talk) 10:01, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

• The image used in the infobox has some licensing template errors. Fix it. The same with the other image in section 2.1.

• I've corrected the licence for the lead image (it was simply on entirely the wrong licence, since the image was not a reproduction of a work of art). I've removed the second image for the time being, since due to the lack of knowledge of the author, I'm unable to remove the error message. Miyagawa (talk) 00:29, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

• ISBN for "Arlington, L.C. (1931)"?

• No ISBN due to the age of the book. Miyagawa (talk) 00:29, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

• Infobox (out of GA criteria): The country name must be the name of the country which used the ship not the present one.

• I've kept China, since it is the common name terminology (even at the time) for the country. Miyagawa (talk) 00:29, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

• I've rethought this and gone with "Imperial China". This isn't as important for this particular ship, but in certain articles it'll be useful to differentiate between Imperial, Republic and People's Republic (in some cases all three!). Miyagawa (talk) 21:20, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Well written. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 08:10, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

@Krishna Chaitanya Velaga: Thanks for reviewing, I've replied to your comments. Let me know if there is anything else. I've also found two images of Yuyuen on Flickr which I'd previously overlooked since they weren't published. Then it occurred to me that those photographs were taken in the UK prior to 1946 with an unknown author and therefore is now in PD regardless of what the uploader on Flickr listed as the copyright tag. So I'm going to take those over the commons shortly and then into the article. Miyagawa (talk) 10:01, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Wait, those images are of the Yangwei - I'm getting mixed up with the articles I'm working on! Miyagawa (talk) 10:03, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

---

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

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:

   Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 12:33, 17 December 2016 (UTC)