Talk:SMS Jagd
Appearance
![]() | SMS Jagd has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: June 26, 2013. |
![]() | Military history: Maritime / European / German GA‑class | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Ships GA‑class | ||||||
|
GA Review
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:SMS Jagd/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Dank (talk · contribs) 17:03, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
Review
- The toolbox checks out.
- "an aviso, of the Imperial German Navy": no comma
- "served in the Training Squadron in 1891, as a torpedo boat flotilla leader": no comma
- "form": from
- "used as a firing platform for torpedo training. She was used in this capacity until she was broken up for scrap": used as a firing platform for torpedo training until she was broken up for scrap
- Otherwise:
- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (reference section):
b (citations to reliable sources):
c (OR):
- a (reference section):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects):
b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- 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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):
b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- - Dank (push to talk) 17:45, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks, Dan - you know, the comma overuse thing used to be a hallmark of my bad writing, but I thought I had kicked that particular habit long ago. Guess not as completely as I thought, at any rate. Parsecboy (talk) 16:56, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
- I've always felt a little uncomfortable in my role as reviewer; I know it's much easier for prose reviewers to see these things than for people who are trying to get everything else right, and I hope writers don't feel like I'm shaming them ... but I suspect that happens. I don't think you have anything to worry about with your writing. - Dank (push to talk) 18:14, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks, Dan - you know, the comma overuse thing used to be a hallmark of my bad writing, but I thought I had kicked that particular habit long ago. Guess not as completely as I thought, at any rate. Parsecboy (talk) 16:56, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
- - Dank (push to talk) 17:45, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail:
Passed. - Dank (push to talk) 19:41, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
Categories:
- Wikipedia good articles
- Warfare good articles
- GA-Class military history articles
- GA-Class maritime warfare articles
- Maritime warfare task force articles
- GA-Class European military history articles
- European military history task force articles
- GA-Class German military history articles
- German military history task force articles
- GA-Class Ships articles
- All WikiProject Ships pages