Talk:HMS Marne (1915)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Zawed (talk · contribs) 01:13, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Claiming this one, comments to follow in due course. Zawed (talk) 01:13, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Lead
 * I made one change for grammar, otherwise looks fine.
 * Thank you.

Infobox
 * Link Marne in the namesake field, otherwise looks fine.
 * Linked.

Design and development
 * ...in peace tanks that were not used in wartime...: I haven't heard of "peace tanks" before, are these external tanks that would be exposed so vulnerable to damage?
 * I think that sounds reasonable, but the sources do not say. Unfortunately there seems to be no data on the difference they made either.
 * ...twin mounts for 21 in (533 mm) torpedoes...: write out inch for consistency with other dimensions
 * In the literature, it is both in and inch, so I am happy either way. I have made it consistent in the body.
 * A single QF 2-pounder 40 mm (1.6 in) "pom-pom": the presentation of the length dimension, metric being first, is inconsistent with all the other dimensions which are imperial first.
 * True. The literature seems to call it a 40 mm even in the UK.
 * Marne was equipped with two chute,...: should chute be plural?
 * Yes. Amended.

Construction and career Citations
 * After the battleship King Edward VII had struck a mine on 10 January 1916,...: suggest adding approximate location if it is available, it would add context as to the area of operations.
 * Added.
 * The gun flashes from the cruiser...: which one, the Castor or one or more of the opposing cruisers?
 * Clarified.
 * ...a hit from a 4.1 in (100 mm)...: write out inch for consistency with other dimensions
 * As above.
 * Note 19: is an end pg range missing or should it be a single page cite?
 * Fixed.
 * Sources look reliable
 * Thank you.

Other stuff
 * No dupe links
 * Image tag checks out OK

That's it for me, looking in pretty good order. Zawed (talk) 09:20, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for an excellent review and your kind comments. I believe all the edits are done. simongraham (talk) 03:43, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Happy with the changes and passing as GA as I believe that this article meets the necessary criteria. Zawed (talk) 03:11, 22 January 2023 (UTC)