Talk:SMS Zieten

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Tomobe03 (talk · contribs) 12:54, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

I'll review this article shortly.--Tomobe03 (talk) 12:54, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

• No disambiguation links found (no action required)
• Checklinks reports no problems with external links (no action required)
• There are several duplicate links in the article which need be removed per WP:OVERLINK. Those are: "torpedo boat", "Whitehead torpedo", "Thames Iron Works", "Kiel", "gunboat" and "Wilhelmshaven".
  • All removed, thanks for catching those.
• The image used in the article is obviously old enough not to be copyrighted anymore, but it still lacks a US public domain tag. Please add one (at the Commons)
  • It does have a US tag.
    • My bad, sorry. Didn't notice the second tag.

Referencing:

• All prose is supported by references (no action required)
• There are two "Journal of the Royal United Service Institution" articles (presumably) used as references in the article. Could you please add missing parameters to the citations: article name, author information and ISSN please.
  • ISSNs for the RUSI Journal only go back as far as 1971, at least according to Worldcat - best I can give you is the OCLC number. As for authors, there aren't any given.
    • OCLCs are fine.
• Please verify that "The Engineering Magazine" used as a reference is this one. If so, please add issn information. Is the name of the editor the only information available for the ref, or can article title and author information be added?
  • No author, but ISSN, title, and page range added.

Prose:

• Is the rank indicated in Commander Alexander von Monts equal to the one described in Commander? If so, I'd link the rank.
  • It's actually more specifically Korvettenkapitän.

MOS:

• There are five instances of single-digit numbers expressed as figures. All of them should be spelled out per WP:ORDINAL. That does not include figures in a {{convert}} templates. I don't mind if those stay as figures, but if you prefer to spell them out, there's {{convert/spell }} template (note a space between "spell" and the first parameter pipe).
  • There are three instances in the line about the ship's crew and there's another in the cruising range line - since there are other numerals in those sentences, they should all be numerals or written out, not a mix of the two. There's another in the armament section ("six 5 cm...") - when using two numbers next to each other, one should be written out and the other expressed as a numeral, to avoid confusion.
    • I was thinking about "... two horizontal 2-cylinder..." but since "two" and "2" are so close together maybe they're best left as is. The other examples were "6 officers and 88 enlisted..." and "...the figure rose to 7 and 99, respectively." but looking at WP:ORDINAL once again those should remain as-is because they represent comparable values. I should have thought this one more thoroughly first, sorry about that.

Nice article, overall - with little to mend. Good work!--Tomobe03 (talk) 11:14, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

All good to go.--Tomobe03 (talk) 20:50, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Image

Here on page 261. Parsecboy (talk) 16:43, 16 August 2022 (UTC)