Talk:SMS Mecklenburg/GA1

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

Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 03:55, 14 September 2010 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * Added. Parsecboy (talk) 10:44, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * It wasn't mentioned specifically in Conways 1906-1921 or Groner, but it was in Conway's 1860-1905. That's what I get for assuming the 1860 volume wouldn't have any further service-related info than the 1906 volume. Parsecboy (talk) 10:44, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * Not that I've been able to track down. There's File:Mecklenburg.jpg on Commons, but it has no source. I could do fair use, but there'd probably be some nitpicker who'd argue it wouldn't satisfy FU-requirements because the purpose of illustrating the ship can be fulfilled by the photo of her sister. And I just don't want to add any potential hassle, you know? Parsecboy (talk) 10:44, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * Not that I've been able to track down. There's File:Mecklenburg.jpg on Commons, but it has no source. I could do fair use, but there'd probably be some nitpicker who'd argue it wouldn't satisfy FU-requirements because the purpose of illustrating the ship can be fulfilled by the photo of her sister. And I just don't want to add any potential hassle, you know? Parsecboy (talk) 10:44, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Not that I've been able to track down. There's File:Mecklenburg.jpg on Commons, but it has no source. I could do fair use, but there'd probably be some nitpicker who'd argue it wouldn't satisfy FU-requirements because the purpose of illustrating the ship can be fulfilled by the photo of her sister. And I just don't want to add any potential hassle, you know? Parsecboy (talk) 10:44, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail: