Talk:SAS President Steyn/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · contribs) 01:23, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Well constructed, will come back shortly. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 01:23, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

• Section 1; para 1; Consistency error between prose and infobox.

Parameter	Prose	Infobox
length	370 feet (112.8 m)	370 ft 0 in (112.78 m)
beam	41 feet (12.5 m)	41 ft 0 in (12.5 m)
Draught	17 feet 6 inches (5.3 m)	17 ft 6 in (5.33 m)

• Fixed

• Consider the adding the "power" parameter to the infobox.
  • Already there, see installed power.
• Section 2; para 1; President Steyn was the middle ship of the three sister ships; the sentence is a bit awkward. Consider rewording it as "President Steyn was the second of the three sister ships" or "President Steyn was the second ship of the class".
• Section 2; para 1; A comma (,) after "8 April 1963"
• Section 2; para 1; with Captain John Fairbairn was in command; I think just "with Captain John Fairbairn in command" is enough.
  • Indeed.
• Section 2; para 1; It is mentioned that she was completed on 8 April 1963, but when was the ship commissioned, it is never mentioned.
  • Good catch
• Section 2; para 2; Please mention what is "Capex 63". An exercise?
  • Moved up from Capex 64
• Section 2; para 2; I suggest a non-breakable space between "Capex" "64" in "Capex 64", for me, on my screen, Capex and 64 appear on two different lines which is a bit awkward.
  • OK
• Section 2; para 2; A comma (,) after "In 1965".
  • No, it's not really a prefatory clause.

• Section 2; para 2; The abbreviations RN and SAN are never defined previously.
  • Good catch.
• Section 2; para 3; made another voyage to Toulon the following year; Did both President Steyn and Emily Hobhouse go, or just Steyn, mention clearly.
  • Good idea.

• Section 2; para 3; Better to mention Johanna van der Merwe's place of build. I mean French-built, Spanish-built etc.
  • Clarified a little more indirectly.
• Section 2; para 3; A comma (,) after "In 1973".
• Section 2; para 4; link "Operation Savannah"
  • Oops.

• Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 10:59, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

---

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

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, 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): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

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:

   Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 12:08, 28 November 2016 (UTC)