Talk:SMS Hannover/GA1

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

Reviewer: Jackyd101 (talk) 16:36, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi there, I am happy to tell you that this article has passed GA without the need for any further improvement. Listed below is information on how the article fared against the good article criteria, with suggestions for future development, mainly concerning additional details that would benefit the article. Although these are not required to achieve GA standard, they might help in future A-class or FAC review process and I strongly recommend that they are followed.
 * It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * At several points in the article, noticeably in the lead the prose doesn't flow very well, with too many full stops breaking it up. Can you work on this to make it smoother?


 * It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * The ship's obsolescence is mentioned in the lead but not in the main body of the article. Can we have a sentance describing this?
 * "Admiral Mauve" is not introduced: can you describe who he was the first time he is mentioned?


 * It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
 * It is stable.
 * It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
 * a (tagged and captioned): b (lack of images does not in itself exclude GA):  c (non-free images have fair use rationales):
 * Overall:
 * a Pass/Fail:
 * a Pass/Fail:

Thankyou and congratulations, an excellent addition to Wikipedia:Good Articles. All the best.--Jackyd101 (talk) 16:36, 29 April 2010 (UTC)