Talk:Battle of Mykonos/GA1

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

Reviewer: Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · contribs) 15:15, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Will take this one. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 15:15, 2 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Lead and infobox;
 * fought in the main harbour; I am not sure about "in the" or "at the"
 * in is correct here


 * A British Royal Navy; redundant phrase, Royal Navy itself indicates that it belongs to British
 * Although the link does go to Royal Navy, technically every navy in Europe at the time was a "Royal Navy" except the French (which had been until 1789). I was advised many years ago to clarify this for non-English readers (from say, the Netherlands or Norway), who might be confused.


 * when the "Hébé-class" French frigate Sibylle
 * Done


 * May I know why "Jacques-Mélanie Rondeau" was red-linked; because a very very few "Commodores" are notable
 * Actually almost all captains, let alone commodores, serving at this stage of the war went on to have very notable careers and most have articles - Rondeau here is the exception rather than the rule. I'll delink if you insist, but he's likely to get one at some stage


 * in 1799 participated -> in 1799, it participated; not able get the flow
 * Done


 * Section 1;
 * French Mediterranean Fleet anchored in the harbour; which harbour?
 * Toulon harbour, as the sentence says.


 * Section 2;
 * In this table, "Guns" refers to all cannon carried by the ship; I think it should be "cannons"
 * Afraid not, the plural of "cannon" is "cannon". English is dumb sometimes.


 * Section 3;
 * opinion of "British" naval historian William James
 * Done


 * 3.2% confidence, violation unlikely.
 * Well written. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 14:35, 8 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the review, see comments above.--Jackyd101 (talk) 14:50, 8 December 2017 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 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 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 10:49, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
 * 1) 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 10:49, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 10:49, 19 December 2017 (UTC)