Talk:Action of 26 July 1806/GA1

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


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * 'with the intention of eliminating the Dutch squadron maintained on Java' - 'based in Java'?
 * Done


 * 'in preparation for a larger force under Rear-Admiral Sir Edward Pellew later in the year' - To do what?
 * Done


 * 'In the evening of 25 July' - 'On the evening'?
 * Done


 * 'Elphinstone then threw his sails back' - What does this mean?
 * Done


 * 'As the damage and casualties mounted on Pallas, Harrier joined the attack and the gunfire from the Dutch ship slackened and finally stopped at 06:10, the Dutch flag was struck from the mast and Pallas surrendered with over 40 casualties from a crew of 250 (including 50 local recruits).' - Run-on sentence, split into two please.
 * Done


 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Again, a little bit about the Dutch being a client state at the start of the article would be helpful as context.
 * Done


 * 'while William, bringing up the rear of the Dutch line, pulled out completely and sailed for the coast' - Any idea why it cut and fled, presumably against orders?
 * Sources do not say, although I presume that the captain considered himself hopelessly outnumbered.


 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * No table of the vessels and casualties involved? Obviously not a requirement, but I've seen them in your articles before.
 * I thought about it, and even tried to put one together, but a table like that would have several holed: casualties and armaments of the East Indiamen are not clear or separated and it creates more confusion to duplicate incomplete information. I have therefore decided not to use one, although if you insist I have no problem discussing it further.


 * 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:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Pass/Fail:

Good article, doesn't need much to be upto GA standard. Skinny87 (talk) 19:24, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for the review, a high standard as always.--Jackyd101 (talk) 23:04, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Welp, I can't find anything wrong now, so passing it. Congrats! Skinny87 (talk) 08:27, 6 October 2009 (UTC)