Talk:HMS Redpole (1910)

Latest comment: 2 years ago by PizzaKing13 in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


This review is transcluded from Talk:HMS Redpole (1910)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: PizzaKing13 (talk · contribs) 23:45, 24 October 2022 (UTC)Reply


I'll go ahead and review this article. PizzaKing13 (Hablame) 23:45, 24 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for picking this up. 15:05, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

Infobox

edit
  • List both between perpendicular and overall length
    • Added. I have also added both displacements.

Lead

edit

Design and description

edit
  • "240-foot" → "240 ft"
    • Fixed.
  • Do we know how many Parsons steam turbines there were?
    • The assumption would be two as there are two shafts, but sister ship Lyra is listed with seven in the text and it is unclear from the sources whether Redpole had a similar set.
  • The infobox says the ship had "2 × single BL 4 in (102 mm) guns" while the body says "a single BL 4 in (102 mm) Mk VIII gun". Which is correct? PizzaKing13 (Hablame) 00:02, 25 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Construction and career

edit
  • When did it join the Second Destroyer Flotilla?
    • Clarified.
  • What's the significance of its visit to Aberystwyth?
    • Clarified.
  • "before the year was out" → "before the year ended"
    • Amended.
  • Add a period after "placed in reserve"
    • Added.
  • Add a comma after "This position did not last long"
    • Added.

Pennant numbers

edit
  • All good

References

edit
  • All good

Image

edit

Overall

edit

Final remarks

edit
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar):   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):   d (copyvio and plagiarism):  
  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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  

@Simongraham: Just a few changes and I'll pass this article. PizzaKing13 (Hablame) 00:10, 25 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

@PizzaKing13: Thank you for your extensive review. I think the changes have been made. simongraham (talk) 15:05, 26 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Simongraham: Everything seems to be done. I'll pass this article now.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.