Talk:Kaiser-class ironclad/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:59, 14 August 2011 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   Add armor to infobox. Details of armament as rebuilt.

   I'd prefer to keep the figures for the ships as built; the two ships were rearmed differently and I don't want to make the infobox too long. Armor added. Parsecboy (talk) 20:46, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

   Ok, then how about some general info in the main body as to what their main guns became?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:13, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

   The 21cm guns were removed, and the info on the new battery is already in the armament section. Parsecboy (talk) 10:50, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

   B. Focused:

   Explain L/20, link boiler, battery, torpedo tube, torpedo. Wooden or iron decks?

   Should all be added, except the last one. Groner doesn't say, but I'd assume teak decks. Parsecboy (talk) 20:46, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail: