Talk:SMS Bussard

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Tomobe03 (talk · contribs) 22:17, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

I'll review this article shortly.--Tomobe03 (talk) 22:17, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

• No duplicate links found in the article (no action required)
• No disambiguation links found in the article (no action required)
• Checklinks reports no problems with external links (no action required)
• Copyvio detector reports no problems with the article (no action required)
• Images:
  • SMS Bussard Daressalam 1907-14.jpg should have US-PD licence in addition to the one already in the Commons
    • I'm on the wireless on campus and sometimes it gets screwy - for some reason, I can't open the file page. It'll have to wait until I get home.
      • Oh, it just opened. I've added the US tag. Parsecboy (talk) 14:06, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Is there a source for SMS Geier.jpg?
    • It's a user created image so no source is required.
      • How can one verify that's SMS Geier then? I mean, I assume it's needed per WP:V.--Tomobe03 (talk) 14:29, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
        • There are line-drawings in Conway's and Gröner, and there are no problems with the drawing as far as I can tell. As far as I'm aware, sources are not required for user created images, since they are inherently interpretive. Parsecboy (talk) 14:35, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
          • That's nice, but it seems that WP:IUP Requirement #2 indeed requires a verifiable source. I'll accept the drawing as verifiable but not on the basis of another wiki article per WP:CIRCULAR. It would be verifiable per Bundesarchiv Bild 134-C0105, SMS "Geier", Kleiner Kreuzer.jpg as it seems to be a reliable source for the drawing, but I trust it would be prudent to add a link to the photo at the drawing page at the Commons as "additional information" or something, just to be on a safe side.--Tomobe03 (talk) 14:39, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
  • All other licencing/caption-related issues are in order (no action requried)
• Referencing
  • The article is fully referenced (no action required)
  • Please add OCLC or ISSN numbers for the Journal of the Royal United Service Institution. I trust they may be found here and here
    • Both added.
• No prose/MOS issues detected (no action required)

Nice article overall, with minor issues to address. Good work!--Tomobe03 (talk) 15:51, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

I added the missing means of verification to the commons drawing of SMS Geier, so everything seems to be good to go! Congrats!--Tomobe03 (talk) 14:43, 19 November 2013 (UTC)