Talk:Ottoman ironclad Asar-i Tevfik/GA1

GA Review

edit
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Caponer (talk · contribs) 15:35, 22 February 2015 (UTC)Reply


Parsecboy, I will complete a thorough and comprehensive review of this article within the next 48 hours. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns in the meantime! Thanks! -- Caponer (talk) 15:35, 22 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

Parsecboy, I've finished my thorough and comprehensive review and re-review of this article, and I assess that it meets the criteria for passage to Good Article status. Before its passage, however, I have shared below some comments and questions that must first be addressed. Thanks again for all your hard work on this article! -- Caponer (talk) 15:52, 22 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar):   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):  
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused):  
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:  
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  

Lede

  • Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section, the lede of this article adequately defines the ironclad, establishes the ironclad's necessary context, and explains why the ironclad is notable.
  • In the introduction sentence, I would format it as such: Âsâr-ı Tevfik (Ottoman Turkish: "God's Favor")[1] was an ironclad warship of the Ottoman Navy built in the 1860s...
    • Sounds good to me.
  • Reword the sentence: "While operating against Bulgarian positions in February 1913, she ran aground; after which, Bulgarian field artillery shelled the ship." Or something like this.
    • How about inserting "...artillery then shelled..."?
  • The image of the Ottoman Ironclad Asar-i Tewfik is released into the public domain and is therefore acceptable for use here.
  • The info box is beautifully formatted and its content is sourced within the prose of the text and by the referenced cited therein.
  • The lede is well-written, consists of content that is adequately sourced and verifiable, and I have no other comments or questions for this section.

Design

  • Should the first sentence specify that it was an entire squadron of the Ottoman Navy?
    • Sure
  • The image of the line-drawing of Âsâr-ı Tevfik '​s original configuration is released into the public domain and is free for use here.
  • This section is well-written, consists of content that is adequately sourced and verifiable, and I have no other comments or questions for this section.

Service history

  • The image of Âsâr-ı Tevfik as originally built is released into the public domain and is therefore free to use here.
  • Add comma after "In June" in the second paragraph of the Russo-Turkish War subsection.
    • Done
  • "On the night of 23–4 August 1877" should be "On the night of 3–4 August 1877."
    • No, it's the 23rd and 24th - but fixed now.
  • Per Wikipedia:Inline citation, inline citations should be consolidated at the end of the sentences and paragraphs in numerical order. However, this is merely a suggestion as WP:INTEGRITY may allow the usage of inline citations within a sentence.
  • Under the First Balkan War subsection, the times should be specifically mentioned as being A.M.
    • The article uses 24-hour time (see for instance the 13:00 referenced in that section)
  • The painting depicting the Greek fleet during the Battle of Elli is released into the public domain and is free to use here.