Talk:HMS Sahib/GA1

Latest comment: 5 years ago by Ed! in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Ed! (talk · contribs) 14:05, 20 January 2019 (UTC)Reply


Giving a look. —Ed!(talk) 14:05, 20 January 2019 (UTC)Reply


GA review (see here for criteria) (see here for this contributor's history of GA reviews)
  1. It is reasonably well written:
    Pass External links, dup links and dab links look good. Copyvio detector returns green.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable:
    Not Yet
    • There's a relative reliance on Uboat.net which leads to an under-detailing of some parts. Some additional sourced I've found to add:
    [1] adds more detail to war patrols;
    • Only two pages mention Sahib during her war period, one of which is probably and error: on 1 July 1943, Sahib was already sunk and thus could not land commands in Sardinia. L293D ( • ) 19:22, 21 January 2019 (UTC)Reply
    [2] notes the crew was commended for sinking U-301
    This book has more details on the sinking per above comment: [3]
  3. It is broad in its coverage:
    Not Yet
    • The infobox data on ship speed is inconsistent with the speed data in the prose.
    • Prose also mentions mines, if they could be added to armament in the infobox.
    • As said in a previous review, the expendable armament such as the number of torpedoes, mines, shells, and machine gun rounds is generally not mentioned in the infobox. L293D ( • ) 19:22, 21 January 2019 (UTC)Reply
    • Her namesake should be mentioned.
    • The "Malta" section needs to be expanded with the aftermath of the sinking of the Scillin and its aftermath, as it's an incident that will likely drive a lot of non-Naval historian traffic to the article. That page has some details for a start, but talk about the inquiry of the captain and the subsequent secrecy of the event.
    • Sounds good, I think you've got what we can get on that part for now. Would be glad to see it expanded some day but the sources have to be there, and I think this is plenty for GA. —Ed!(talk) 00:39, 22 January 2019 (UTC)Reply
    • "Algiers" section: Since Finale, Italy doesn't have a link, is there somewhere close to it that can be linked?
    • Any other commanders than the one listed when the ship was launched?
    • Last patrol: What was the effect of the depth charges? What on the ship was damaged to cause it to be forced to surface?
    • How many of the crew returned home after the war?
    • Where's the wreck? Has it been located?
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy:
    Pass No problems there, though per above more diversity of referencing needed.
  5. It is stable:
    Pass No problems there.
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate:
    Pass Images tagged PD as appropriate.
  7. Other:
    On Hold Pending a few fixes. —Ed!(talk) 14:38, 20 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

OK, so all of the additions are bringing it in line with the GA criteria, I'm thinking. Going to Pass at this point. Thanks for your responsiveness! —Ed!(talk) 00:39, 22 January 2019 (UTC)Reply