Talk:Peresvet-class battleship/GA1

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

Reviewer: QatarStarsLeague (talk · contribs) 17:04, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

This one has been languishing for a while, so I will review. QatarStarsLeague (talk) 17:04, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Lead
The lead is very good, and eloquently explains the history and lives of these three ships. Excellent.

Design
I need a reference for the Belleville boilers line Everything else were are good on.

Armament
I need a reference for the Liuzhol line. Everything else we are good.

Protection
I need a reference for the Krupp/Harvey armor line. I also need a reference for the dual conning tower line. Everything else good.

Careers
Construction of the Oslyabaya was delayed you say; why was that? What was the Poveda named after? Everything else is good.

Conclusion
This review really was one that I enjoyed, as I learned alot about Russian naval warfare. As soon as these issues are addressed, I can pass it. Congratulations! QatarStarsLeague (talk) 19:05, 4 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm glad that you liked the article. I normally only provide a cite at the end of a paragraph if it provides the source for the entire paragraph. If I've used multiple sources then each one is cited and each one covers all the material up to the previous cite. Forex, cite 5 in the secondary armament paragraph covers the first two sentences while cite 7 in that same paragraph covers the following pair of sentences.
 * I assumed this, but I just wanted to confirm it. QatarStarsLeague (talk) 00:00, 5 December 2012 (UTC)


 * None of my sources specified the reasons for Oslyabya's construction delays other than problems at the shipyard.


 * Pobeda's name means victory, hence the parentheses. How can I emphasize that more? Thanks for your review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:58, 4 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Okay, everything is good. Congratulations! QatarStarsLeague (talk) 00:00, 5 December 2012 (UTC)