Talk:HMS Stork (1916)/GA1

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

Reviewer: PizzaKing13 (talk · contribs) 17:54, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

I'll go ahead and review this article. PizzaKing13  (Hablame)  17:54, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Infobox

 * lowercase "broken up" PizzaKing13   (Hablame)  18:01, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Does it matter if the length listed is between perpendiculars or overall, or both?
 * It now has both for completeness.
 * The infobox states the draught is "8 ft 5 in" while the body states it is "8 ft 6 in". Which is correct?
 * Probably both and different points in the hull, but the mean is 9 ft according to the source. Amended.

Lead

 * Hyphenate "R class" in the second sentence
 * Done.
 * Same for "M class"
 * Done.
 * Insert a comma after "torpedo boats"
 * Done.
 * Start a new paragraph at "After the armistice that ended the war"
 * Done.
 * Remove "However"
 * Done.

Design and development

 * Paragraph 1
 * Hyphenate "M class"
 * Done.


 * Paragraph 2
 * Comments about the measurements themselves are in the infobox commentary section
 * I have revisited the numbers in this paragraph and ensured that they are consistent with the sources.
 * Lowercase "Displacement" and add "Its" before it
 * Amended.


 * Paragraph 3
 * All good PizzaKing13   (Hablame)  18:11, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Construction and career

 * Paragraph 1
 * All good


 * Paragraph 2
 * Add a comma between "hits were reported" and "but the German"
 * Done.
 * Add a comma between "sunk by Sylph" and "and SS Cito"
 * Done.


 * Paragraph 3
 * All good


 * Paragraph 4
 * All good


 * Paragraph 5
 * Do we have a date the break up was completed? PizzaKing13   (Hablame)  18:17, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately not in the sources.

Pennant numbers

 * All good

References and sources

 * All sources are appropriate and are all used
 * Since they have page numbers attached to them, is it possible to move "Dunkirk War Memorial: Naval Arrangements", "Allied Dead at Ostend: Monument Unveiled", "News in Brief", and "Shore Defence Practice on the Thames" into the bibliography section, as the article by Naval Staff Monographs already is?
 * My reasoning is that the items are only a page long, as the sections in The Navy List are.
 * Change "pp" (pages) to "p" (page) in reference 5 (Naval Staff Monograph No. 35 1939, pp. 13.)
 * Done.
 * Navbar and categories are good PizzaKing13   (Hablame)  18:22, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Images

 * HMS Rob Roy (1916) IWM SP 1347.jpg properly licensed and appropriate caption, but do we know the second ship's name? I assume that an image of a sister ship is used as there is no free image (or any image) of the Stork?  PizzaKing13   (Hablame)  17:59, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
 * That is right. There is no known free image of Stork I have access to, but, as the second ship is unknown, it may be Stork in the background. simongraham (talk) 12:52, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Overall

 * No war edits
 * Focused on topic
 * Broad in coverage
 * Layout is good
 * Neutral POV PizzaKing13   (Hablame)  18:25, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Final remarks

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


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 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:
 * 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:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

Very good job! Just some grammar checks and some questions about the material and I'll go ahead and pass this article. PizzaKing13  (Hablame)  18:25, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for such a thorough review and your kind comments. Please see my comments above and tell me if I missed anything. simongraham (talk) 12:52, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Everything has been addressed. Congrats! I'll now pass this article. PizzaKing13   (Hablame)  20:18, 22 October 2022 (UTC)