Talk:Kii-class battleship/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Ed! (talk · contribs) 11:04, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

• "By 1918, the Navy had gained approval for an "eight-six" fleet, all ships under eight years old." -- You should explain what "eight-six" means in this sentence.
  • Done.
• "However, having four large battleships and four battlecruisers on order put an enormous financial strain on Japan, which was spending about a third of its national budget on the Navy." -- You should note which ships (class or name) were on order or under construction at this time.
  • Done.
• Is there a policy about using the "degrees" symbol as opposed to the word?
  • Not that I'm aware of. Just have to be consistent.
• "The ships' keel laying was stopped on 5 February because the terms of the Washington Naval Treaty that forbade their construction." -- Maybe add this was because of their weight, right? It sounds like the treaty was crafted specifically to stop these ships.
  • Everybody was getting into a new round of exceedingly expensive ship building after the war. The Treaty stopped that in its tracks. I've rephrased this, hopefully it's a bit clearer
• Also, was there any effort to reduce their weight or anything?
  • No, battleships have significant economies of scale that mean that the larger ship is better than a smaller one, all other things being equal. More expensive, but more combat worthy.
• One duplicate link (main belt) and no dab links. External links look good.
• No photos of the ships I understand, but maybe an image or Hiraga would be good, or something like that?
  • Done. Thanks for the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 02:05, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
• I see no problems with article stability.

Placing the article on hold. —Ed!^(talk) 11:20, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Great work! Passing the GA now. —Ed!^(talk) 02:23, 29 April 2013 (UTC)