Talk:Attacker-class escort carrier/GA1

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

Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:13, 18 December 2010 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * I have done another round of copy edits and hopefully caught everything. -- Diannaa (Talk) 19:13, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * I've added the data for the eight ships of the class that are discussed here, but where are the other three, Searcher, Ravager and Tracker? What about modifications to the ships after the accident with Dasher in 1943? And substitution of British radars and guns for American ones? Friedman, pp. 187-88 covers all this.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:44, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Searcher etc were Ruler class escort carriers --Jim Sweeney (talk) 11:24, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Not according to Friedman, Conway's and Brown. The Attacker/Tracker class consisted of the ships ordered under FY42 and the Rulers were FY43 ships with significant internal differences. Friedman discusses the whole thing pretty thoroughly in his chapter on Trade Protection.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:07, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * I've added the data for the eight ships of the class that are discussed here, but where are the other three, Searcher, Ravager and Tracker? What about modifications to the ships after the accident with Dasher in 1943? And substitution of British radars and guns for American ones? Friedman, pp. 187-88 covers all this.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:44, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Searcher etc were Ruler class escort carriers --Jim Sweeney (talk) 11:24, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Not according to Friedman, Conway's and Brown. The Attacker/Tracker class consisted of the ships ordered under FY42 and the Rulers were FY43 ships with significant internal differences. Friedman discusses the whole thing pretty thoroughly in his chapter on Trade Protection.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:07, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Searcher etc were Ruler class escort carriers --Jim Sweeney (talk) 11:24, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Not according to Friedman, Conway's and Brown. The Attacker/Tracker class consisted of the ships ordered under FY42 and the Rulers were FY43 ships with significant internal differences. Friedman discusses the whole thing pretty thoroughly in his chapter on Trade Protection.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:07, 3 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Oh, and what about the American catapult the ships carried?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:28, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:

Thanks for the review. I'll tackle whatever issues haven't been handled today or tomorrow. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 23:50, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Everything is "technically" fixed. If 3B remains a concern, then one of the OMT people will probably have to do some improvements to fix that; I'm far from an expert on this kinda stuff and probably wouldn't be able to put it in. Wizardman  Operation Big Bear 04:31, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I've got the necessary info on all the ships at home; I'll add it once I get there after the 30th.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:59, 26 December 2010 (UTC)