Talk:HMS Caradoc (D60)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 09:14, 18 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Will review over the weekend. Miyagawa (talk) 09:14, 18 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Ok, let's finally get to this. At least then it'll be before the following weekend!


 * Image licence is good.
 * No dab links.
 * External links are all fine.
 * Link C-class cruiser when it appears in the first sentence of Design and description (as it'll be the first appearance in the article body itself).
 * Likewise, Royal Navy in the first sentence of Construction and career, and Grand Fleet in the same paragraph and Second Battle of Heligoland Bight in the following paragraph.
 * Link Bolshevik in the third paragraph of that section where it appears for the first time.
 * Ummm, linked in the lede.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:40, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
 * You can remove the link to Estonia.
 * I got chastised in a recent review for not linking (obscure) countries, and given the geographic illiteracy so common nowadays, I've taken that reviewer's comment to heart.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:40, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Link Chanak Crisis where it appears in the article body (it only appears once there and once in the lead).
 * Second World War: [Pound sterling|£]two million - the wikilink is broken.
 * New York City 28 October 1941–26 February 1942 - stick "between" inbetween City and 28.
 * South Africa, 21 June–3 July - throw a between in there too.
 * Link East Indies Fleet towards the end - either piped to Eastern Fleet, or skip that and then just link Eastern Fleet when you specifically mention it.
 * References are all good, and I like the research template.


 * That's everything - it's just all fiddling with links mostly. Miyagawa (talk) 19:33, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for reviewing this, Miyagawa. I generally only link on first use, regardless of location in an article of this length.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:40, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
 * No worries - I just checked WP:REPEATLINK and it isn't particularly clear about whether there should be multiple links or not. It isn't helpful when a guideline throws a "general" in there and then contradicts itself in the following sentence! So happy to leave things as they are. Passing. Miyagawa (talk) 22:00, 25 March 2016 (UTC)