Talk:HMS Fury (H76)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 16:05, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Will do this soon. JAG UAR   16:05, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguations: No links found.

Linkrot: No linkrot found in this article.

Checking against the GA criteria

 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * "HMS Fury was an F-class destroyer built for the Royal Navy in the 1930s" - could be more specific, was it not 1933?
 * "By July 1942, a Type 286 short-range surface-search radar" - de-link this if not notable
 * "Photos taken of the ship in July 1944 show her with a Type 271 radar mounted on her searchlight platform that was probably installed during her last refit" - this sentence needs a citation
 * "The ship cost 248,538 pounds" - why not £248,538?
 * "before beginning a brief refit on the Humber." - link the Humber
 * "On the night of 15/16 November she bombarded Leros with the destroyers Exmoor and ORP Krakowiak[42] On" - missing full stop
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * The assertions regarding the cameramen could be original research, but both candidates are included in the reference given.
 * 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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Pass/Fail:

Another well researched article that has nothing to major enough to constitute it being put on hold. I noticed a few minor prose issues, but they can be addressed any time. JAG UAR   21:08, 30 January 2016 (UTC)