Talk:U-101 class submarine/GA1

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

Hi! I'll be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have the full review up soon. Dana boomer (talk) 19:32, 4 January 2009 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * I'm a little startled at the use of what is essentially one source for the entire article. Is there just not that much written on this subject?
 * I've found no other source that gives any details like those provided in Conway's. I know of German-language sources that cover A-H ships and subs, but do not have access to them (or speak German). — Bellhalla (talk) 15:18, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * 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, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Overall, a nice article, with just a quick question about references that I'd like answered before I pass the article. Please let me know if you have any questions. Dana boomer (talk) 19:46, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review. (Comment interspersed above.) — Bellhalla (talk) 15:18, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Allright, I'll take your word for it :) Thanks for the reply, and I'm passing the article to GA status. Dana boomer (talk) 17:22, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Overall, a nice article, with just a quick question about references that I'd like answered before I pass the article. Please let me know if you have any questions. Dana boomer (talk) 19:46, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review. (Comment interspersed above.) — Bellhalla (talk) 15:18, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Allright, I'll take your word for it :) Thanks for the reply, and I'm passing the article to GA status. Dana boomer (talk) 17:22, 8 January 2009 (UTC)