Talk:German battleship Tirpitz/GA1

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

Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:17, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * I only saw one - let me know if my change resolved it. Parsecboy (talk) 12:20, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * ✅: It's Oslo. Manxruler (talk) 00:14, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
 * 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:
 * Links and armor added, shp in the infobox was for Bismarck, not Tirpitz, radar equipment added. Parsecboy (talk) 12:20, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Disambiguate caisson and add the armor to the infobox.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 12:57, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Done. Parsecboy (talk) 13:33, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
 * B. Focused:
 * 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:
 * 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: