Talk:SMS Prinz Eugen (1912)/GA1

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

Reviewer: ~  Nerdy Science  Dude  22:11, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

I will be reviewing this article shortly. ~  Nerdy Science  Dude  22:11, 12 September 2010 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * Looks good.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * More citations in the "Construction" section would be nice.
 * Fixed. Added some Conway's and Sokol's.-- White Shadows Your guess is as good as mine 23:21, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * No problems here.
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * Looks neutral to me.
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * No edit wars detected.
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * Images look good and illustrate the article.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Looks good, but I have one comment pointed out above. I will pass it once the comment has been responded to. ~  Nerdy Science  Dude  23:11, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

It looks good, so I'll pass it. Congratulations! ~  Nerdy Science  Dude  23:31, 12 September 2010 (UTC)