Talk:H-class battleship proposals/GA1

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

Reviewer: Nick-D (talk) 10:08, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Comments
This article easily meets the GA criteria - great work. My suggestions for further improvements are:
 * The lead should (briefly) identify what Plan Z was
 * "The ship's radius of action was to be at least equal that of the Deutschland-class cruisers" - it would be best to specify what that was in this article to save people from having to follow the link
 * Assessments by historians on the merits of the various designs would probably be worth including
 * It would be interesting to discuss the ships' planned aviation capabilities, as these seem unusually large

Assessment against the GA criteria
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * 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:
 * 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:

Nick-D (talk) 10:08, 10 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for reviewing the article. I'll probably hold off on making the suggested improvements (all of which are excellent, btw) until I'm ready to take the article to ACR/FAC, but I didn't want you to think I missed the review page. Thanks again. Parsecboy (talk) 03:14, 13 April 2011 (UTC)