Talk:SMS Emden (1916)/GA1
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Sven Manguard Wha? 21:36, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
GAN Quicksheet 1.23 SM
(Criteria)
Starting comments:
I don't really see myself getting into MilHist GAN reviews in the longer term because I really don't have any familiarity with any of this. It is the cup though, so I'm taking it as an excuse for trying new things.
1. Well written:
- a. prose/copyright:
Needs work
- - "On 14 October, Emden participated in an operation to clear the Kassar Wiek of Russian naval forces." - Consider instead "On 14 October, Emden participated in an operation to clear the Kassar Wiek, a XXXXX, of Russian naval forces.". This would unnecessary if there was an article on the Kassar Weik, but since there isn't, and because that one isn't particularly self explanatory, I'd be nice if you made this change.
- That's a good point - added a description of what it is. Parsecboy (talk) 12:24, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- - "On 14 October, Emden participated in an operation to clear the Kassar Wiek of Russian naval forces." - Consider instead "On 14 October, Emden participated in an operation to clear the Kassar Wiek, a XXXXX, of Russian naval forces.". This would unnecessary if there was an article on the Kassar Weik, but since there isn't, and because that one isn't particularly self explanatory, I'd be nice if you made this change.
- b. MoS compliance:
Acceptable
2. Accurate and verifiable:
- a. provides references: Acceptable
- - I don't own any of these books, but with your volume of work, if you were up to something dirty I'd think someone would have caught you a long time ago. Therefore I'm not that worried that I can't see the sources.
- b. proper citation use: Acceptable
- c. no original research: Acceptable
3. Broad in coverage: 
Section acceptable
- a. covers main aspects: Acceptable
- b. focused/on topic: Acceptable
4. Neutral: Section acceptable
5. Stable: Section acceptable
6. Image use: Section acceptable
- a. license/tagging correct: Acceptable
- b. relevant/properly captioned: Acceptable
7. Additional items not required for a GA, but requested by the reviewer:
- a. images that should have alt texts have them: Acceptable
- - The image probably dosen't need one.
- b. general catch all and aesthetics: Acceptable
Comments after the initial review:
It's almost scary how little work was needed on this one. Truly you've ironed out the kinks. This is very close to getting the green button, and you my peas award; there's just one thing in 1a. Sven Manguard Wha? 22:20, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
PROMOTED You fixed the one issue that needed fixing, so this is good to go. Sven Manguard Wha? 22:20, 24 January 2012 (UTC)