Talk:Zara-class cruiser (1879)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Iazyges (talk · contribs) 15:08, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Will start soon. Iazyges  Consermonor   Opus meum  15:08, 5 September 2017 (UTC)


 * As far as I can see, the article fits the "Immediate Pass" bill; some prose suggestions are offered, but the prose is already understandable, so it is passable. Iazyges   Consermonor   Opus meum  18:06, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Criteria
GA Criteria:
 * 1
 * 1.a ✅
 * 1.b ✅
 * 2
 * 2.a ✅
 * 2.b ✅
 * 2.c ✅
 * 2.d ✅
 * 3
 * 3.a ✅
 * 3.b ✅
 * 4
 * 4.a ✅
 * 5
 * 5.a ✅
 * 6
 * 6.a ✅
 * 6.b ✅
 * No DAB links ✅
 * No Dead links ✅
 * Images appropriately licensed ✅

Prose Suggestions

 * "Despite the lengthy design process, the ships proved to be failures in service, primarily the result of their low speed." perhaps "primarily as a result of their low speed" or " primarily because of their low speed"
 * Works for me.
 * " As a result of her different hull, Sebenico is sometimes not included in the Zara class." More of a personal question, but is it mentioned if she is considered her own class, or part of a different class? -- Iazyges   Consermonor   Opus meum  18:12, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Conway's and Greger both list her as a unique type. Thanks for these two reviews, Iazyges. Parsecboy (talk) 18:25, 5 September 2017 (UTC)