Talk:HMS Medway (1928)/GA1

Latest comment: 11 years ago by Chris troutman in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Chris Troutman (talk) 17:21, 27 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Review

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):  
  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):  

Overall:
Pass/Fail:  

  ·   ·   ·  

I reviewed this article to ensure it met GA criteria. I was able to find the Rohwer book but am AGF on the others. The image being used is licensed by the Imperial War Museum, so it's permissable for use. I would recommend that anyone reviewing for A-Class or FA ensure that information about time spent with China Station is added. There are other references from the submariner point of view that mention Medway that can be added. The current version meets the GA criteria, as being sunk was the only action this vessel ever saw. Chris Troutman (talk) 21:11, 27 June 2013 (UTC)Reply