Talk:SMS Schwaben/GA1
Latest comment: 14 years ago by Jim Sweeney in topic GA Review
GA Review
editArticle (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Jim Sweeney (talk) 00:06, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars etc.:
- No edit wars etc.:
- It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
Comments
edit- The text states there were six 45 cm (18 in) torpedo tubes while the inf box has 5 × 45 cm (17.7 in) torpedo tubes
- The footnote could use a cite
- The inf box has - Fate: Scrapped in 1920 but the text says - battleship was stricken from the naval register on 8 March 1921 needs clarification
--Jim Sweeney (talk) 00:21, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
- All three fixed, thanks for reviewing the article, Jim. Parsecboy (talk) 11:08, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
- Passed --Jim Sweeney (talk) 14:23, 22 September 2010 (UTC)