Talk:HSwMS Niord/GA1

GA Review

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

Nominator: Simongraham (talk · contribs)

Reviewer: Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk · contribs) 12:53, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

I'll take a look at this shortly. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 12:53, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Prelim

• Long tons and nautical miles are duplicated links
  • Removed.
• File:HMS Niord.jpg has no US PD and not currently sure about the existing Swedish rationale as no publishing date is provided for the "published anonymously before 1 January 1954" rationale.
  • Updated the source and licenses.
• Article is stable
• Earwig reports copyvio unlikely

Lede and infobox

• First class needs a hyphen
  • Added.
• "However, this service did not last long." I would consider 4-5 years of service to be enough that this sentence isn't needed
  • Removed.
• Main text could more explicitly explain the namesake (to avoid needing an infobox citation)
  • Added.
• Should the infobox have the design speed instead of the trials speed?
  • Good point. Changed.
• Complement differs between infobox and main text
  • Oops. Amended.

Design and development

• Why/how was Oden successful? First sentence of the first paragraph is tipping the reader straight into the deep end!
  • Clarified.
• A word on what makes a ship "first-class"?
  • Added.
• "After reconstruction" give the year here
  • Added.
• Link bow
  • Added.
• Link nickel-steel
  • Added.
• Suggest moving the searchlight mention to the end of the third paragraph, seems awkward coming after unrelated armour explanation
  • Moved.

Construction and career

• Sentence beginning "On 20 February 1904..." has two "in response"s which is awkward reading
  • Reworded.
• Day Bosanquet was a knight (1905)
  • Added.
• Do we know where she was based during her service? Which parts of the coast, or which port?
  • Unfortunately, the sources do not give any more information than I have given.
• "out of the front-line service"
  • Removed.
• "and finally to be an exhibit" something missing here
  • Clarified.

References

• References look good. AGF for print sources.

@Simongraham: Hi, apologies for the delay (my work is making these more common than they should be!), that's all I have for now. Not sure if Sturmvogel 66 might want to be involved as well? Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 17:17, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

@Pickersgill-Cunliffe: Not a problem. Very kindly, Sturmvogel 66 has already had a look through and provided very helpful suggestions, which have already been acted on. Please look at my comments above. I believe all the changes you request are done. simongraham (talk) 17:42, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

@Simongraham: Passing this article as satisfying the GA criteria. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 17:49, 16 April 2024 (UTC)