Talk:HMS Hood/GA1

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

Reviewer: Jim Sweeney (talk) 11:56, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * 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:
 * 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:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

Comments

 * 1) There is a citation required tag in the lede
 * Deleted the objectionable word.


 * 1) In the Modern theories on the sinking section there is a clarification tag and it needs a cite at the next sentence.
 * Cleaned up.


 * 1) Ref 1 needs publisher and access date details
 * Done


 * 1) Ref 39 what makes http://www.gwpda.org/naval/bcs001.htm a reliable site
 * Changed


 * 1) Same with ref 48 http://www.naval-history.net/xDKWW2-4009-22SEP01.htm which also needs an accessdate
 * Deleted the cite.


 * 1) Refs 55,56 and 57 are bare URL's and need the cite web template
 * Done


 * 1) Ref 72 needs publisher and accessdate added
 * 2) Some books in the bibliography are missing ISBNs
 * Added


 * 1) The external links need checking a lot are dead links
 * Cleaned up


 * 1) Ref 2 Jackson is not in the bibliography
 * changed


 * 1) Same with ref 24 Friedman
 * Added


 * 1) Same with ref 37 Gardiner, Gray and Budzbon
 * changed


 * 1) Same with ref 38 Morison and Polmar
 * Done


 * 1) There are a mixture of citations style see refs 51 and 53 Talyor 51 with the year 2004 and 53 without the year.
 * Cleaned up


 * 1) Same with Jurens see refs 52 and 68
 * Jurens et al. is different than Jurens 1987.


 * 1) In the bibliography Campbell, N. J. M. (1978). Battle Cruisers. Warship Special does not seem to be used unless its for ref 15 which needs the year added.
 * Deleted


 * 1) Same with Northcott, Maurice P. (1975). Hood: Design and Construction.
 * See above


 * 1) Refs 52, 71 and 79 Jurens needs the year adding presume its the 2002 book
 * See above.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:20, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. --Jim Sweeney (talk) 12:27, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Passed --Jim Sweeney (talk) 22:37, 21 September 2010 (UTC)