Talk:Italian cruiser Vettor Pisani/GA1

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

Reviewer: Caponer (talk · contribs) 20:25, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

, I will complete a thorough and comprehensive review of this article within the next 48 hours. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns in the meantime. Thanks! -- Caponer (talk) 20:25, 25 February 2015 (UTC)


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

, I've completed my thorough and comprehensive review and re-review of this article, and I find that it meets all the criteria for passage to Good Article status. Prior its passage, however, I have shared below some comments and questions that should be addressed. Thanks again for all your hard work on this article. -- Caponer (talk) 20:36, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, no copyvios, 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):
 * 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:

Lede
 * Per Manual of Style/Lead section, the lede of this article adequately defines the cruiser, establishes the cruiser's necessary context, and explains why the cruiser is notable.
 * The info box is beautifully formatted and its content is sourced within the prose of the text and by the referenced cited therein.
 * The image of Italian armored cruiser Carlo Alberto is released into the public domain is therefore acceptable for use here.
 * The lede could stand to have some more content included from the "Design and description" section for a more comprehensive summary of the entire article. This could be done by stating how many guns the ship had, or mentioning the size and number of its compliment.
 * The lede is well-written, consists of content that is adequately sourced and verifiable, and I have no other comments or questions for this section.

Design and description
 * The image of the right elevation and plan drawing of the Vettor Pisani-class armored cruisers from Brassey's Naval Annual 1902 is released into the Public Domain and is therefore free for use here.
 * This section is well-written, consists of content that is adequately sourced and verifiable, and I have no other comments or questions for this section.

Construction and career
 * The mention of the Italian Legation in Peking successfully radioing the ship off the coast of China should be included in the lede, as this one of the first long-range radio transmissions to a ship and is therefore quite notable.
 * The Italo-Turkish War of 1911–12 should be wiki-linked here in its first mention in the main prose.
 * This section is otherwise well-written, consists of content that is adequately sourced and verifiable, and I have no other comments or questions for this section.

I've added the information about the radio message to the lede and have expanded it in other ways as well. Given the short length of the article I see no need to link terms in both the lede and the main body.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:35, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Sturmvogel 66, thank you for addressing my above comments and for making those final edits to the article. I hereby pass it to Good Article status. Congratulations on a job well done! -- Caponer (talk) 23:36, 25 February 2015 (UTC)