Talk:Jade-class aircraft carrier/GA1

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

Reviewer: Ed! (talk • message • contribs • count  • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= logs ] • email)


 * GA review (see here for criteria) (see here for this contributor's history of GA reviews)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written:
 * 2) A little background on the two ships would help. What were they doing before they were selected, and how were they acquired?
 * They were operating on Norddeutscher Lloyd's East Asia Service - added. As to how, Groner simply states that they were "taken over..." with no indication that there was any compensation to NDL. Parsecboy (talk) 15:29, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Why were these two ships selected? It sounds like half of the characteristics of the ships derived from their pre-existing states, not how they were going to be modified.
 * Groner doesn't say why - presumably because they were relatively large, sufficiently fast ships. Parsecboy (talk) 15:29, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) "This was due to the resignation of Admiral Erich Raeder, the commander in chief of the Kriegsmarine, the previous month." - why did this affect things? Was Raeder an outspoken proponent of the conversions or did someone else decide not to pursue them?
 * Raeder resigned to protest Hitler's order that the entire German surface fleet be broken up after the Battle of the Barents Sea - added a line to this effect. Parsecboy (talk) 15:29, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable:
 * Pass
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage:
 * Pass
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy:
 * Pass
 * 1) It is stable:
 * Pass
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate:
 * 2) It seems that an article like this has a particularly strong need for images, given the unusual nature of the ships or what they were supposed to look like. Are there any diagrams or drawings at least?
 * Nothing free use - there's a linedrawing in Groner that would probably fall under fair use. Parsecboy (talk) 15:29, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Just have a few suggestions, once again trying to get a "bigger picture" view surrounding the project and how it came to be. Otherwise a great article. — Ed! (talk) 04:31, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I think it's all clear enough now. Passing the GA. — Ed! (talk) 22:59, 31 August 2011 (UTC)