Talk:SMS Schleswig-Holstein/GA1

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

Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 02:42, 26 May 2010 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * I saw only one clarify tag, does what I added make it clear? Parsecboy (talk) 12:55, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 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:
 * There are actually several books on this ship (1, 2, 3), but no US library appears to have a copy of them, or at least according to Worldcat anyway.
 * As for the scuttling on 21 Mar, Groner mentions that (not sure how I missed that before). Parsecboy (talk) 12:55, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * There's a copy of Linienschiff Schleswig-Holstein : Flottendienst in drei Marinen at Vanderbilt under 75350253. Gotta check every edition, that's one of the PitA's with OCLC. I won't hold things up at this level, but I'd strongly suggest that you get it before the ACR.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 13:18, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * B. Focused:
 * Yes, it should be 1915, not 16. I added conversions and engine info to the infobox. Does the Interwar section look better now? Parsecboy (talk) 12:55, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * IMO the infobox for a ship article should be as complete as the class article. I just copy over the latter and adjust for the individual ship. And it does read better.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 13:18, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * That's usually what I do too, but I apparently forgot in this case. Parsecboy (talk) 13:25, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 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:
 * None that I've seen that could be proved to be PD. All of the Bundesarchiv photos on Commons are Reichsmarine or after. Parsecboy (talk) 12:55, 26 May 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:
 * None that I've seen that could be proved to be PD. All of the Bundesarchiv photos on Commons are Reichsmarine or after. Parsecboy (talk) 12:55, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * None that I've seen that could be proved to be PD. All of the Bundesarchiv photos on Commons are Reichsmarine or after. Parsecboy (talk) 12:55, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:

You're missing a couple of publisher locations in your refs, but you've got time to fix those.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 13:18, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Will do. Thanks for reviewing the article. Parsecboy (talk) 13:25, 26 May 2010 (UTC)