Talk:HMS Carysfort (1914)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 11:35, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

I'll have this to you soon. JAG UAR   11:35, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Initial comments

 * I think that the lead could be expanded somewhat to summarise the article. The body of the article is quite comprehensive, so adding some details about its career might be possible
 * See how it suits now.
 * The lead doesn't mention when or where she was commissioned
 * Normally I only orientate the reader to the decade in which a ship was built and leave the rest for the main body. But since people might not actually know when WWI was, I've added the year.
 * "For anti-aircraft defence, she was fitted with one QF 6-pounder 57 mm (2.2 in) Hotchkiss gun. The ship also mounted two twin, above-water, mounts for 21 in (533 mm) torpedos" - any reason why metric is before imperial in the first instance? Also, isn't torpedoes the correct plural?
 * "The walls of their conning tower were 6 inches thick" - convert to millimetres
 * Already done of first use.
 * "was replaced by a Ordnance QF 3-pounder 47 mm (1.9 in)" - metric is mentioned before imperial here. I'm fine with it but I was wondering if it was an oversight?
 * "in occupied Belgium" - link German occupation of Belgium during World War I
 * Good idea.
 * No dead links

Those were all of the minor issues I could bring up. But overall, it's a well written and comprehensive article. JAG UAR   11:57, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review. Let me know if any issues still remain.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:34, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for addressing them! With all of those out of the way, this meets the GA criteria now.  JAG  UAR   20:56, 1 April 2016 (UTC)