Talk:HMS Boreas (H77)/GA1

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

Reviewer: CrowzRSA (talk · contribs) 18:36, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Cleaned up, looks fine now.
 * Lead


 * Description
 * Why is millimeter spelled out sometimes but othertimes abbreviated? ("Boreas had two 40-millimetre (1.6 in) QF 2-pounder Mk II AA guns" vs. "quadruple torpedo tube mounts for 21-inch (533 mm) torpedoes"). Shouldn't it be abbreviated to maintain consistency with the rest of the article?
 * The conversion template always abbreviates the second unit.
 * "The ship was fitted with a Type 119 ASDIC set to detect submarines by reflections from sound waves beamed into the water." this sounds odd to me. perhaps reword to "The ship was fitted with a Type 119 ASDIC set to detect submarines by sound wave reflections beamed into the water."
 * How can you beam a reflection into the water?
 * ...Regardless its really the word "from" that reads badly. "of" sounds much better than "from".
 * See how it reads now.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:22, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * You are inconsistent with the anti aircraft abbreviation as well. The line "By October 1940, the ship's anti-aircraft armament was increased when the rear set of torpedo tubes was replaced by a 3-inch (76.2 mm) (12-pounder) AA gun and 'Y' gun was removed to compensate for the additional depth charges added." contains both the word and abbreviation.
 * Done.


 * Construction and service
 * Should £221,156 not be converted to American dollars?
 * It's a capital cost and really can't be converted into a meaningful figure using price indexes and the like.
 * "Her service in the Mediterranean was uneventful until shortly before she returned home when Boreas evacuated civilians at the start of the Spanish Civil War in July 1936 before beginning a refit at Portsmouth that lasted until 26 September." This sentence needs to be broken up.
 * Agreed.
 * Shouldn't Greek Navy be Hellenic Navy? It also needs to be wikilinked.
 * It's spelled out and linked in the lede.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:25, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * The lead doesn't specify to readers that the Hellenic Navy is the Greek Navy. Even though it is linked, it has potential to be confusing to readers.
 * Done.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:22, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


 * References
 * link all locations (except where it is noted twice [i.e. Annapolis, Maryland and Naval Institute Press])
 * I never link publisher locations in bibliographies. Thanks for looking this over.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:19, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * link World Ship Society
 * link Naval Institute Press to United States Naval Institute
 * Just about every major publisher has an article, why link to just these? In fact, why link to any? I think that you're going overboard with the idea of linking stuff in the bibliography. It's not a GA or FA requirement and I don't think that it improves the article any.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:25, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Final thoughts
 * I'm placing this article on hold until the issues are addressed. Crowz  RSA  20:00, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail: Good to see another HMS at GA
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail: Good to see another HMS at GA
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail: Good to see another HMS at GA