Talk:Italian cruiser Basilicata

Italian cruiser Basilicata has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Italian cruiser Basilicata is part of the Protected cruisers of Italy series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
November 25, 2014	Good article nominee	Listed
February 13, 2018	Good topic candidate	Promoted

Current status: Good article

Ships

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles

Military history: Maritime / European / Italian

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	European military history task force
	Italian military history task force (c. 500–present)

GA Review

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

This review is transcluded from Talk:Italian cruiser Basilicata/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Peacemaker67 (talk · contribs) 10:00, 24 November 2014 (UTC)Reply

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	struck in 1937? (Infobox) Whoops, must have copied the box from Campania and forgot to remove that line Y
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	the ship did nothing between completion of fit-out and the date of its sinking? There was a war on, surely she sortied as some point? Nothing I've been able to track down - the ships weren't really intended for naval combat (they'd have been slow, juicy targets for U-boats), they were meant for colonial policing (and I assume they were sent to Italian East Africa, but there's nothing out there to confirm or deny). Marshall (1995) The Encyclopedia of Ships, p. 33 mentions service off North Africa. I know that's not much, but it's something. Thanks for finding that, I don't know how I missed it while I was trawling through Google Books. It'd be nice to be able to see the rest of the entry, but heck, the book is only $2 on Amazon, I'll just order it. I've added what I can from the Google Books preview (to this article and the others) and will add whatever else I can once it arrives. Parsecboy (talk) 13:21, 25 November 2014 (UTC) YReply
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	no images
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	no images
	7. Overall assessment.	Passing, well done.

Add topic