Talk:SM U-2 (Austria-Hungary)/GA1

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

Hi there again, I am happy to tell you that this article, like its sister ship, 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 a suggestion 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):
 * 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):
 * 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:

Additonal comments

 * I see that you have fixed the link to Brioni Island, so thats no problem. As before, the lead is a little longer than is normal and could perhaps be summarised more consisely. However, again this is not a significant problem and is only a matter of taste, please don't feel obliged to change it.--Jackyd101 (talk) 22:25, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou and congratulations, another excellent addition to Wikipedia:Good Articles. All the best.--Jackyd101 (talk) 22:25, 25 November 2008 (UTC)