Talk:SM U-5 (Austria-Hungary)/GA1

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

Hi there again, (it looks like it's unfashionable to review military GAs at the moment!) I am happy to tell you that once again this article has passed GA without the need for any further improvement (its nice to see that pointers I gave on previous reviews have been taken up on nominated articles, I quite often see the opposite). Listed below is information on how the article fared against the good article criteria, with a suggestion for future development. This is not required to achieve GA standard, but might help in future A-class or FAC review process.--Jackyd101 (talk) 00:19, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review and your suggestions, which are always appreciated. (To me, it's not about getting a particular award for an article, but making it the best that it can be.) — Bellhalla (talk) 05:37, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * "The Italian captain received the Medaglia d'Oro al Valore Militare for his sacrifice" - is there a better way to put this than sacrifice? It sounds a little melodramatic.--Jackyd101 (talk) 00:19, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Changed to "… for his actions." instead.
 * 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: