Talk:Formidable-class battleship/GA1

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

Reviewer: Djmaschek (talk · contribs) 02:10, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Formidable-class battleship
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Formidable-class battleship you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Djmaschek (talk) 02:10, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Here are my review comments. Djmaschek (talk) 03:43, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Design
 * Paragraph 1: "The Board concluded that repeating the Canopus class, since..." This sentence seems incomplete. Suggest: "The Board decided against repeating the Canopus class, since..."
 * Good catch, fixed
 * Paragraph 3: "...though in general they are viewed as a distinct class." Suggest: "...though other historians view them as a distinct class." ("In general" seems too vague.) See my next comment.
 * Fixed
 * Paragraph 3: One question that I had when reading the article was WHY the three Formidables are considered a separate class. Do any of the authors address this question? If so, then I think a 1-2 sentence explanation should be included in the article, especially since this issue is brought up in the introduction ("The class formed the basis for the nearly identical London class...").
 * A good idea - have added a line on this.
 * General characteristics and machinery:
 * Complement infobox = 780 is not supported by a citation. Cited text has Complement = 788.
 * Probably a typo - good catch
 * Cruising range numbers are slightly different in infobox and text, perhaps due to different conversion parameters. (9,400 km; 5,900 mi) vs (9,450 km; 5,780 mi).
 * Fixed
 * Draft = 26 ft (8 m) or 25 ft 11 in (7.90 m) OK, I'm being super picky here!
 * Fixed
 * Armament and armor:
 * Paragraph 1: "per gunThe Formidable" Needs punctuation and space.
 * Fixed
 * Paragraph 2: They are already in the infobox, but I would put links to all 3 types of secondary guns in the text. This is up to you however.
 * Works for me
 * Paragraph 3: Contradiction? "The Formidable-class ships were the first British battleships to use Krupp armour…" This appears to contradict a statement in the Design section. "...a new ship that incorporated the advances of the Canopus class—namely, Krupp armour and..." Please clarify.
 * Fixed
 * Paragraph 3: It says there were 2 armored decks. The first is described, but it's not clear to me what are the characteristics of the second one. Are some words missing?
 * The second one is the main deck - tweaked a bit to hopefully make the distinction clearer, let me know if that works.
 * Service history:
 * Paragraph 2: "In October while Implacable was..." This is a not a sentence. Drop "while" and it becomes a sentence.
 * Probably something that got rewritten a few too many times
 * Paragraph 2: "only around 150 were killed..." Suggest: Drop "only". 150 is 20% of the crew which still seems like a lot.
 * Sounds good. Thanks for reviewing the article. Parsecboy (talk) 13:21, 7 December 2018 (UTC)