Talk:HMS Anne (1915)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Anotherclown (talk · contribs) 10:03, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Progression

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

Technical review

 * Citations: The Citation Check tool reveals no errors (no action required).
 * Disambiguations: two dab links :
 * Armenian
 * Tarsus
 * Linkrot: External links check out (no action required).
 * Alt text: Image lacks alt text (suggestion only).
 * Copyright violations: The Earwig Tool is currently not working, however spot checks using Google reveal no issues (no action required).

Criteria

 * It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * Missing word here: "...several Allied ships that were going bombard Smyrna, Turkey..."
 * Typo here: "...until the end of the months...", perhaps "...until the end of the month..."
 * Missing word here: "...and its primary duty was watch Turkish positions..."
 * Minor inconsistency in language as you use "Turkish" and "Ottoman" interchangably. Might pay to be consistent.
 * All done.


 * It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Some large paragraphs only have a single citation at the end. I assume this is because the entire paragraph is referenced to that citation? It might pay to increase the citation density to make this clear, although I don't believe it is a requirement (suggestion only).
 * It is.
 * Consistent citation style used throughout.
 * No issues with OR.


 * It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Article appears to cover all major aspects.


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


 * It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * Significant recent work, although it all looks constructive.
 * 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:
 * Image has a fair use rationale and appears to be appropriate for the article.


 * Overall:
 * a Pass/Fail:
 * This article looks fairly close to meeting the criteria, just a couple of prose issues and the question about citations. Happy to discuss any points you disagree with. Anotherclown (talk) 10:48, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:48, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Too easy. Passing review now. Anotherclown (talk) 07:47, 28 November 2011 (UTC)