Talk:Action of 18 August 1798/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Skinny87 (talk) 15:31, 18 December 2009 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * 'while Leander had been detached by Nelson on 6 August, passenger Captain Edward Berry charged with carrying despatches to the squadron under Earl St Vincent off Cadiz.' - Some rogue words here, unsure what is trying to be said or I'd fix it myself.
 * 'On 1 August 1798 British fleet of 13 ships of the line and one fourth rate ship under Rear-Admiral Sir Horatio Nelson' - 'A British fleet', little thing.
 * 'a convoy under its protection which carried the French army under Napoleon Bonaparte intended for the invasion of Egypt.' - Would suggest replacing'under' with 'commanded' to avoid repetition of the former.
 * 'Pushing through the gap, Foley attacked the French van from the landward side' - can we wikilink 'van' please?
 * 'Only four French ships: two ships of the line and two frigates, escaped' - The colon doesn't seem to work here, and replacing with a comma would seem to be the best line of action.
 * 'Généreux managed to escape from Corfu to Brindisi, where Le Joille was killed by artillery fire from the castle overlooking the town.' - This is a tad confusing. Who controlled the town, and if they were the enemy why did he sail there?
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 'This left Thompson with just 282 men on board Leander.' - What was the ship's usual full complement, then? It would be handy to know, putting the number before or after this number.
 * I think roughly 350, although the source doesn't say. I will do a bit of research this weekend and see if I can find out.--Jackyd101 (talk) 01:28, 19 December 2009 (UTC)


 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Pass/Fail:

An excellent article, and the controversial elements are handled with aplomb and NPOV as far as I can tell. A few more things to clear up this time, mostly copy-editing, and then it can be passed. Skinny87 (talk) 15:44, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review! One reply given and all other points addressed. Regards--Jackyd101 (talk) 01:28, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * This is all good - the ships' complement doesn't seem to be a major point that will hold up the promotion. Excellent work! Skinny87 (talk) 09:45, 19 December 2009 (UTC)