Talk:German destroyer Z16 Friedrich Eckoldt/GA1

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

Reviewer: AustralianRupert (talk · contribs) 11:05, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status. AustralianRupert (talk) 11:05, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Progression

 * Version of the article when originally reviewed:
 * Version of the article when review was closed:

Technical review

 * a (Disambiguations): b (Linkrot)  c (Alt text)  d (Copyright)
 * two dabs found by the tools:
 * ext links work;
 * image lacks alt text (not required; suggestion only) ;
 * spot check searching online showed no copyright violations.

Criteria

 * It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * in the lead, "heavy cruiser" is probably overlinked;
 * in the body, "Skagerrak" is probably overlinked;
 * slight redundancy, I think: "The following month, she escorted the pocket battleship Lützow from Kiel to Norway in mid-June" (specifically "The following month" and "in mid-June");
 * Your changes look good. Thanks. AustralianRupert (talk) 06:16, 19 December 2011 (UTC)


 * It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * No issues.


 * It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * in the body "4,400 nautical miles (8,100 km; 5,100 mi) at 19 knots", but in the infobox: "1,825 nmi (3,380 km; 2,100 mi) at 19 knots";
 * Look again, intended range was 4400 nmi, but actual was 1825.
 * I see. Sorry, I'm still confused, though. Further on the prose says "The effective range proved to be only 1,530 nmi (2,830 km; 1,760 mi) at 19 knots". AustralianRupert (talk) 14:02, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Fixed.--Sturmvogel 66 00:40, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Cheers. AustralianRupert (talk) 02:11, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * "She was rammed by a Norwegian freighter in Tromsø on 12 October". Do we know if this was an accident, or deliberate?
 * Clarified.
 * Thanks. AustralianRupert (talk) 06:16, 19 December 2011 (UTC)


 * It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
 * No issues.


 * It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * No issues.


 * It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
 * a (tagged and captioned): b (Is illustrated with appropriate images):  c (non-free images have fair use rationales):  d public domain pictures appropriately demonstrate why they are public domain:
 * The current image used in the article is of the ship's sister. That is no drama as it serves a purpose, but obviously not ideal. I wonder if it would be possible to replace it with one of the actual ship itself. I found some in this search (some excellent ones, including a depiction of the ship's final moments - copyrighted though). I'm not sure if any of them can be used, but please take a look and let me know.
 * I've replaced the fair use image with a painting that was on Commons. I'm sorry I didn't find this before (in fact I found it by accident when I clicked on the Battle of the Barents Sea article). I've removed the fair use one because I figure that it is not really possible to make a legit fair use claim if there is one with an OTRS ticket. Please let me know what you think. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 06:48, 19 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Overall:
 * a Pass/Fail:
 * Just a couple of minor things to tweak or discuss. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 12:20, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * All done. Thanks for the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 13:17, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for budding in, according to HRS volume 3 page 153 the coordinates are 77°19' north 30°47' east. MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:59, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, added.--Sturmvogel 66 00:40, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I have passed the article now. Thanks Sturm and MisterBee. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 02:11, 21 December 2011 (UTC)