Talk:HMS Llewellyn (1913)

HMS Llewellyn (1913) has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: April 23, 2021. (Reviewed version).

Military history: Maritime / British / European / World War I

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	World War I task force

Ships

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips

GA Review

Latest comment: 3 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion

This review is transcluded from Talk:HMS Llewellyn (1913)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Zawed (talk · contribs) 08:47, 16 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

I will review, comments to follow in next few days. Zawed (talk) 08:47, 16 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

Infobox

In the builder field, should recite the name in full. The way it is presented at the moment, it looks like it is part of a location.
- Done.

Design

105 long tons... starting a sentence with a number should be avoided. Zawed (talk) 10:57, 19 April 2021 (UTC)Reply
- Done.
24 hours during testing.?
- Done.
Why is quote marks used around pom pom in the infobox but not in the text?
- Different sources have both, but I have changed the text for consistency.

Construction

...the 1912–1913 Programme...: probably need more context for the Programme
- Done.
River Clyde mentioned here, but Clydebank in the infobox.
- Reference to Clydebank removed as unnecessary.
Originally laid down as Picton, Llewellyn was renamed... since you have already established the original in the previous sentence, perhaps reword. May be: "The ship was renamed Llewellyn by Admiralty order on 30 September 1913,..."
- Done
...the first alphabetical class of the Navy... perhaps a bit more context here? I've read a few RN ship articles but this is the first I've heard of the alphabetical class.
- Clarified and expanded.
~~On the~~ The following day...
- Done.
After returning to service,.... This implies she may have been damaged or refitted?
- Clarified.
escort~~ing~~ed troop convoys to France
- Done.
one of which struck the destroyer. need to mention that the bow was damaged as mentioned in the lead.
- Done
without additional casualties. this would imply some casualties due to the torpedo strike?
- Clarified.

Bibliography

Monograph No. 35 listed but not cited?
- Removed.
Wrong dash style for the pg range in Newbolt.
- Fixed.

Other stuff

No dupe links
Image tags check out OK.

That's my initial pass done. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 10:57, 19 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Zawed: Thank you for the review. Please check through my changes and tell me if there is anything else. simongraham (talk) 14:44, 21 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

Looks good, I made one small edit. Passing as GA as I consider that this meets the necessary criteria. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 10:22, 23 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

Add topic