Talk:HMS Daring (H16)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Miyagawa (talk) 17:14, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

I will be reviewing this article shortly. Miyagawa (talk) 17:14, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

• No dab issues.
• All external links functioning.

• Description: Was this the standard setup for a D class destroyer? Obviously you don't need to go into great detail and compare everything, but if there was any specific changes then that should be mentioned.
  • Yeah, this was the standard configuration for the class, although half had the 2x 2-pdrs and half had 2x quad .50-calibre MGs.
• Career: I moved a reference to the next punctuation mark after HMS Wishart as it looked a bit lost in the middle of a sentence.
  • OK
• Career: Although I agree that Otto Kretschmer is legendary, technically it's non neutral. Can you replace with something else?
  • Simplest to just delete it. Thanks for the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 04:32, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Other than that, I think it's all good to go. Miyagawa (talk) 17:25, 12 July 2011 (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): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

   Suitable references in place.

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:

   Following that amendment, the article is now neutral in tone.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   All stable.

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):

   Image has appropriate licence.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   All in all a good job. Miyagawa (talk) 11:58, 13 July 2011 (UTC)