Talk:Etna-class cruiser/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Skinny87 (talk) 15:26, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

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

   wl Taranto in the lede?

   Elswick's full name needs to be given in the Design and description section, as the lede shouldn't be mentioning facts not (completely) found in the main text.

   Done.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   'For anti-torpedo boat defense the first three ships mounted five 57-millimeter (2.2 in) 6-pounder Hotchkiss guns' - What did the fourth carry? Is this linked to the third (small) paragraph in the Armament section? If so, this should be clarified.

   It is, and I've rephrased it.

   The third paragraph in the Armament should be merged into the previous or next paragraph given its small size.

   Done

   Did any of the ships do anything specific during the Boxer Rebellion?

   Nothing that I know about; they probably contributed landing parties, but that's just a guess.

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:

A few points to be clarified, and then this can be passed. Skinny87 (talk) 15:26, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Wow, you may yet run me out of GANs today! Greatly appreciated, though.

I can but try :) Passing now. Skinny87 (talk) 16:47, 10 October 2010 (UTC)