Talk:USS Steamer Bay/GA1

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

Reviewer: Zawed (talk · contribs) 20:25, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

I will take this one, comments to follow. Zawed (talk) 20:25, 8 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Lead: the namesake is mentioned in the lead but not article body. Might also pay to mention that Etolin Island is in Alaska for greater context.
 * Partially ✅, I don't really like including the namesake in the article body. It's a way to introduce the subject, and beyond that, there isn't much relevance.
 * The issue here is that because it is only in the lead, it effectively isn't cited. Like with Kadashan Bay, I would stick it in the constructions section. Zawed (talk) 21:19, 22 November 2019 (UTC)


 * " Uniflow reciprocating steam engines": the infobox refers to "Unaflow steam engines"?


 * Consistency - some numbers are written out but some expressed as numerals, e.g. "8 Bofors 40 mm...", "12 Oerlikon 20 mm..."


 * Consistency - generally dates are recited as 15 May, 10 July, but there are a couple of instances of e.g. the 15 May


 * The citations ending the first paragraph of Design and description are out of order.


 * Some battles are mentioned in the Design and description but not linked here. They are mentioned later but really should be linked on first mention.
 * They're linked in the lead and in the infobox.
 * Both of those are distinct from the main section, i.e. it is OK to link the lead, infobox and main body. Zawed (talk) 21:19, 22 November 2019 (UTC)


 * 16 FM-2 fighters, it may pay to include Wildcat in the description as not many readers will recognise the FM-2 designation. Same with the TBM-3. I note the infobox says 27 aircraft carried but the text refers to 28.
 * ✅, body does mention that the carrier was designed to carry 27 aircraft, but she spent most of her career with 28.
 * Whoops, sorry, I totally missed the context of the 27/28 aircraft. Zawed (talk) 21:19, 22 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Mention the battle honours in the text?
 * Stylistic choice, I remember someone saying that battle stars aren't really notable unless there's a whole bunch of them, which isn't the case here. I would be open to putting them in the body, but I'm not sure where it would fit in.
 * This is another citing issue - everything in the infobox needs to be supported by the text so the absence of a commentary on the battle honours means that the mention in the infobox is uncited. I would suggest sticking mention at the end of the World War II section, something like, "She finished the war with six battle stars for..." I just did a review on USS O'Flaherty which cited her battle stars to this websource,, that may help. Zawed (talk) 21:19, 22 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Dupe links: Felix Stump, 3rd Fleet

That's my comments for now. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 01:46, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Image tags check out OK
 * I made a few tweaks to the text, make sure these are OK.
 * I've replied to your points. Stikkyy t/c 05:56, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, I've addressed your points. Stikkyy t/c 04:14, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
 * This all looks good, passing as GA since I consider the article meets the criteria. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 08:46, 17 December 2019 (UTC)