Talk:Russian monitor Novgorod/GA1

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

Reviewer: Peacemaker67 (talk · contribs) 11:49, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Fixed the link. I'm not sure what you want me to do about the images. They're 140 years old, so it's not exactly unreasonable to assume that the photographer, whoever he was, is long dead, although possibly not long enough. I wish that I could find a publication history so we could know if they were published before 1923 or not. All I do know is that recent publications of them have sometimes been credited to a couple of Russian naval historians who also collected photos that they couldn't have taken themselves. The preponderance of evidence, mainly their age, leads me to believe that they're out of copyright. You may feel differently, especially if you expect proof positive of their provenance, but their age weighs very heavily with me. If they were more recent, I'd want better documentation, like I had to do with the Oslyabya photos, but in this case....

I do have a question for you if you have a little bit of time. Russian monitor Vitse-admiral Popov was the other ship built by Popov and I've stalled out on finishing the article because of the sheer amount of redundancy with Novgorod about the peculiarities of the design. Even though the two ships aren't really sisters, they're the only ships build according to Popov's principles and I'm wondering if it would be best to write up a "class" article where all the common information about them could be covered in detail, which would allow me to trim both of the individual ship articles down to just the stuff about them. What do you think?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:26, 23 August 2015 (UTC)


 * I agree that they have a lot of commonality, and that a "class" article (Popov-designed monitors?) would help pull out the repetitive nitty gritty. As far as the images are concerned, I do sympathise, but I get pulled up all the time on image licensing for Austro-Hungarian ships in particular. It took me forever to get just one image acceptable at A-Class for each of the A-H/Yugoslav river monitors, and I just don't feel I can let these pics go through to the keeper without a view from someone far more experienced in image copyright. In the interests of fairness, I'm pinging and asking her for a second opinion on the images used in this article. Cheers, Peacemaker67  (crack... thump) 02:00, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
 * An 1873/74 photographer could have been as young as his 20s, which would make it quite possible for him to have died less than 100 years ago (though more than 70). What is the earliest known publication for File:Popovship002-4.jpg and File:Popovship002-5.jpg?
 * We can't use File:NovogorodBuilding.jpg without more information - the given source was published in 1998 so the URAA tag does not apply. Does the book itself credit an earlier source?
 * From what I can tell the artist of File:KrasovskiyN_PribPopovNovCV.jpg died in 1906, so this is fine as life+100. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:42, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Tracking down the history of the photos is going to be very time-consuming, so I've deleted them for now.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:18, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Dealt with all of your comments, see how they suit.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 13:54, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * All good. Passing. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 06:21, 3 September 2015 (UTC)