Talk:USS Iowa (BB-4)/GA1

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

Reviewer: AustralianRupert (talk · contribs) 09:06, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

I will review this article shortly. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:06, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Initial comments/suggestions: AustralianRupert (talk) 10:29, 27 November 2019 (UTC)


 * there are no dab or dup links and the ext links all work (no action required);
 * formally decommissioned on 23 May 1914 -- infobox seems to say 27 May 1914
 * 23 May is correct per DANFS
 * limited commission on 23 April -- infobox seems to say 28 April 1917
 * Must've been a typo with the box
 * as part of Fleet Problem I in February -- suggest adding "1923" here
 * Good catch
 * presence in a 25,000 square miles (65,000 km2) area --> "25,000-square-mile (65,000 km2) area" (suggest turning the adjective function on in the template)
 * Fixed
 * reduced blast interference between them --> suggest clarifying what "them" is referring to here
 * Done
 * the displacement figure in the infobox doesn't match the body
 * Fixed
 * references all seem to be reliable (no action required)
 * Footnote 13: suggest maybe changing this from "Underwater Archeology Branch" to "Naval Historical Center" as the publisher/author?
 * Works for me
 * Footnote 15 has a formatting error "& 13 May 1991"
 * Fixed
 * in the References, suggest moving the link for the Naval Institute Press to the first mention
 * Good catch
 * in the References, some of the ISBNs use hyphens and some don't (for instance see Herder)
 * Fixed
 * "File:LC-DIG-DET-4a14261 (18565145659).jpg": probably needs the date field updated on the Commons description page
 * Good catch. Thanks AR. Parsecboy (talk) 13:36, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
 * No worries, nice work. Passing now, per the below. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 07:22, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Criteria

1. Well written: ✅
 * a. the prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct; and
 * b. it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.

2. Verifiable with no original research: ✅


 * a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
 * b. all in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines;
 * c. it contains no original research; and
 * d. it contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism.

3. Broad in its coverage: ✅


 * a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and
 * b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. ✅

5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute ✅

6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: ✅


 * a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
 * b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.