Talk:SMS Kurfürst Friedrich Wilhelm/GA1

GA Review

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

Hi there, I am happy to tell you that this article has passed GA without the need for any further improvement. Listed below is information on how the article fared against the Wikipedia:good article criteria, with suggestions for future development. These are not required to achieve GA standard, but they might help in future A-class or FAC review process.

• It is reasonably well written.

  a (prose): b (MoS):

• Can you possibly rephrase the "ancient central battery ironclad Mesudiye"? I understand that in military parlance of the time the 40-year old ship was "ancient", but its not clear for readers that are unfamiliar with naval expressions of the time.

• I added "—built in the early 1870s—" to the line, does that clarify exactly what is meant by "ancient?"

• It is factually accurate and verifiable.

  a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

• I notice in the lead and in the final paragraph that there are a few references that come in the middle of sentances. Can you move them to after punctuation to make it easier to read?

• I wanted to avoid any implication that a specific citation covered anything more than what it did, even if it was half of a sentence. Should I try to reword those lines to avoid mid-sentence citations?

• It is broad in its coverage.

  a (major aspects): b (focused):

• Out of interest, who was the commander of E11 at that time? Was it Martin Nasmith (in which case he should be mentioned and linked)?

• If I remember correctly (which I may not), that wasn't the commander of the sub. Unfortunately, I'm away from my books right now, so it'll have to wait until Monday before I'll be able to check.

• It follows the neutral point of view policy.

  a (fair representation): b (all significant views):

• It is stable.

  

• It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.

  a (tagged and captioned): b (lack of images does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):

• Overall:

  a Pass/Fail:

Thankyou and congratulations, an excellent addition to Wikipedia:Good Articles. All the best.--Jackyd101 (talk) 23:18, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

I've already passed the article as is, so I leave all of the above to your best judgement. Good job.--Jackyd101 (talk) 02:19, 13 September 2009 (UTC)