Talk:SMS Kurfürst Friedrich Wilhelm/GA1

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

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. These are not required to achieve GA standard, but they might help in future A-class or FAC review process.
 * It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * Can you possibly rephrase the "ancient central battery ironclad Mesudiye"? I understand that in military parlance of the time the 40-year old ship was "ancient", but its not clear for readers that are unfamiliar with naval expressions of the time.
 * I added "&mdash;built in the early 1870s&mdash;" to the line, does that clarify exactly what is meant by "ancient?"


 * It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * I notice in the lead and in the final paragraph that there are a few references that come in the middle of sentances. Can you move them to after punctuation to make it easier to read?
 * I wanted to avoid any implication that a specific citation covered anything more than what it did, even if it was half of a sentence. Should I try to reword those lines to avoid mid-sentence citations?


 * It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Out of interest, who was the commander of E11 at that time? Was it Martin Nasmith (in which case he should be mentioned and linked)?
 * If I remember correctly (which I may not), that wasn't the commander of the sub. Unfortunately, I'm away from my books right now, so it'll have to wait until Monday before I'll be able to check.


 * 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) 23:18, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I've already passed the article as is, so I leave all of the above to your best judgement. Good job.--Jackyd101 (talk) 02:19, 13 September 2009 (UTC)