Talk:HMS London (1899)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:HMS London (1899)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Peacemaker67 (talk · contribs) 03:08, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

This article is in good shape. A few comments from me:

• in the lead, suggest "Commissioned in the same month,..." to avoid repetition
  • Good idea
• suggest "naval construction forby the Russian Navy"
  • Well, the Navy wasn't building the ships themselves in most cases (apart from the ships built in the Admiralty Yards
• "it was a virtual repeat of the preceding"
  • Good catch
• the beam conversions between the body and infobox don't match
  • Fixed
• the displacements are converted to LT in the body and t in the infobox
  • Fixed
• number of shafts not in the body
  • Fixed
• the speed conversions between the body and infobox don't match
  • Fixed
• the kW conversion between the body and infobox don't match
  • Fixed
• the number of 12-pounders doesn't match between the body and infobox
  • Fixed
• where were the TTs located? amidships?
  • As at Implacable, I can't say for sure
• the armour conversions between the body and infobox don't match, and are in cm in one and mm in the other
  • Fixed
• link Krupp armour
  • Done - here and at Implacable
• no crew numbers mentioned in the body
  • It's there, in the second para of the Design section
• no damage from the collision with SS Don Benite?
  • Nothing mentioned in Burt, no
• is there a useful link for Medway?
  • That'd be River Medway
• there is some italicisation of ship names needed
  • Good catch
• "were at Portland."
  • Fixed
• not just the "Landing at Cape Helles", suggest dropping this as London was involved in the Landing at Anzac
  • Fixed as at Implacable
• link 3rd Brigade (Australia)
  • Done
• antitorpedo nets needs a hyphen to be consistent with earlier usage
  • Fixed
• File:Formidable class battleship diagrams Brasseys 1906.jpg needs a US PD-1923 tag
  • Already fixed
• File:Hmslondon 11th and 12th battalions.jpg doesn't need a US PD tag, as Crown Copyrights expire worldwide. There is also no publication date to support the current US PD tag.
  • Good point, removed.

That's me done, placing on hold for the above pretty minor matters to be addressed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:48, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks again! Parsecboy (talk) 16:51, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

This article is well-written, verifiable using reliable sources, covers the subject well, is neutral and stable, contains no plagiarism, and is illustrated by appropriately licensed images with appropriate captions. Passing. Nice work! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:17, 20 November 2018 (UTC)