Talk:SS Chester A. Congdon/GA1

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

Reviewer: Ealdgyth (talk · contribs) 16:55, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

I'll pick this one up. Ealdgyth (talk) 16:55, 18 March 2022 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Refs:
 * What makes the following reliable sources? *** https://www.greatlakesvesselhistory.com/histories-by-name/s/salt-lake-city a reliable source? It appears to be one guy's blog.
 * ✅. Removed refs throughout the article.
 * And http://www.superiortrips.com/Congdon_Shipwreck.htm ?
 * This website is run by Ken Merryman, the co-founder of the Great Lakes Shipwreck Preservation Society.
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Refs:
 * What makes the following reliable sources? *** https://www.greatlakesvesselhistory.com/histories-by-name/s/salt-lake-city a reliable source? It appears to be one guy's blog.
 * ✅. Removed refs throughout the article.
 * And http://www.superiortrips.com/Congdon_Shipwreck.htm ?
 * This website is run by Ken Merryman, the co-founder of the Great Lakes Shipwreck Preservation Society.
 * This website is run by Ken Merryman, the co-founder of the Great Lakes Shipwreck Preservation Society.


 * https://web.archive.org/web/20020416234925/http://www.boatnerd.com/swayze/shipwreck/c.htm?
 * Boatnerd is a respectable resource on Great Lakes shipping.


 * Lead:
 * The second paragraph is full of details that really don't need to be in the lead. Definitely needs to be cut down on the intricate details that really should only be in the body of the article.
 * Background:
 * "in 1882, Onoko, an iron freighter, temporarily became the largest ship on the lakes." while interesting... I can't see how this helps our understanding of the ship built in 1907.... same for "Two years later, a steel package freighter, Susquehanna, became the largest vessel on the lakes." and "In 1895, the first 400 feet (121.9 m) freighter was constructed. The first 500 feet (152.4 m) freighters were built five years later."
 * ✅. I tweaked the final two sentences.
 * Design:
 * "Salt Lake City was the third last ship "10,000-ton capacity class"." I have no idea what this means? I suspect there's a word missing somewhere. And do we really need the three refs on this? Two should be enough for something this uncontentious. One would be fine.
 * Not required for GA, but does "Built with an arched frame system designed to create an unobstructed cargo hold, Salt Lake City was equipped with 32 telescoping hatch covers." really need FOUR refs? There are other spots where three or four refs are put on information - again, not needed for GA but it makes the text harder to read and makes it look like there's some controversy about the information that requires tons of refs...
 * ✅. I also removed several other refs.
 * Service history:
 * "damaging two of her hull plates" who's plates? Weston's or Congdon's?
 * I randomly googled three phrases and only turned up Wikipedia mirrors. Earwig's tool shows no sign of copyright violation.
 * I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth (talk) 21:38, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorted. GreatLakesShips (talk) 22:03, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Those look good, passing this now. Ealdgyth (talk) 22:46, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth (talk) 21:38, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorted. GreatLakesShips (talk) 22:03, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Those look good, passing this now. Ealdgyth (talk) 22:46, 19 March 2022 (UTC)