Talk:SS Kaiser Wilhelm der Grosse/GA1

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

Reviewer: Starstriker7 - public(talk) 06:35, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

I'll take on this review. --Starstriker7 - public(talk) 06:35, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Lead

 * "The first of four sister ships built" - In the article, why is "sister ships" italicized?
 * "marked the beginning of a huge change" - "Huge" feels kind of unencyclopedic. Can you find a synonym?
 * "an all third class ship" - I'm not sure what an all third class ship is. Can this be wikilinked?

Origins, conception and construction

 * "thus decrease that of the British." - There are two periods following this in the article. Remove the one after the citation.
 * " NDL however, was the first company to name any of their liners in honour of members of the Imperial family, purely to flatter the emperor." - Firstly, there should be a comma between NDL and however. Secondly, the "purely to flatter the emperor" portion sounds awkward. Did the name their liners to flatter the emperor, or were they the first to do it for that reason?
 * "which was to b named" - Should be self-explanatory. :P
 * "had it not been for the Great Eastern of 1860." - Two comments. Firstly, there are two periods following 1860 in the article, so remove the one after the citation. Secondly, "Great Eastern" connects to a disambiguation page. Can you link it to the actual article of the Great Eastern? Also, should Great Eastern (?) be italicized?
 * "Imperial family, it was the emperor who baptised the ship" - Imperial family. The emperor baptised the ship
 * "her regular crossings, her maiden voyage being" - her regular crossings. Her maiden voyage was

Career

 * "from the immigrant's wishing" - from the immigrants wishing
 * "From her maiden voyage, she was the only superliner to date who had travelled the Atlantic with such speed and such media attention." - This sentence doesn't really make sense to me. Was it the fastest and the most well-covered in terms of the media? If so, you should clarify that.
 * "22.3 knots successfully showing the new German competition." - Two notes: firstly, you did the double period thing again, so fix that. Also, I don't think the "successfully showing the new German competition" is necessary.
 * "been held by the Cunard Liner," - been held by a Cunard Liner,
 * "how the British would retaliate" - Move the period before the citation, and replace "retaliate" with the more neutral "respond".
 * "to the new German superliner, the aptly named Deutschland of" --> to the newer German superliner Deutschland
 * "Hamburg America Line." - You did the double period situation here. Get that fixed up.
 * "This change in events was acceptable to Germans who were able to relax in the knowing that they were still the owners of the fastest liner, however NDL promptly ordered that the Kaiser Wilhelm der Grosse was to undergo a refit to ensure that they were the dominant German company." - This is a rather awkward sentence (it runs on quite a bit, and is rather verbose). Can you try to simplify this?

Overall comments involving prose
I am stopping at this point before totally reviewing criterion 1. A full copyedit should be completed before this article can proceed through the GA process. This article's prose has a great ring to it, for the most part, but such prose probably belongs more in nonfiction books and the like.

I will continue reviewing for the remaining criteria.

Criterion 2
Otherwise, the article is very well-referenced. Most of the sources, however, are offline, so you should add ISBN codes and the like for the books. This is not part of the GA criteria, and you will not be held to this.
 * "A popular ship, she has largely been forgotten, having lived in the shadow of her British counterparts." - In the lead. This seems like a challengeable statement. Source this.
 * Reference 23's formatting is still in French.

Criterion 3
The article looks sufficiently broad and well-focused.

Criterion 4
The article gives no undue weight to opposing sides, in my opinion. I don't really see a place where it could happen.

Criterion 5
The article appears stable, according to its edit history.

Criterion 6

 * This photo's copyright information has a discrepancy. How do you know if the copyright information is valid if you don't know who the author is? I have the same issue with this file and this one too.

Overall comments
I applaud the work you've done on this article, Bonjour LaLaLa. You've done an excellent job in filling out this article comprehensively. Unfortunately, I do feel that this article requires an extensive proofreading before this can be considered for GA status, so I will fail this nomination for now. However, it looks like you won't be editing this article for a very long while, so I'll leave comments for editors interested in taking up where you left off.

To all interested parties...If you'd like a place to start, I suggest you look at WP:GOCE and contact somebody there. I hope you work out the article's prose issues and renominate this for GA really soon, because this here is the start of something great. :) --Starstriker7 - public(talk) 07:20, 15 July 2011 (UTC)