Talk:Action off Lofoten/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

I'll review this article later today. As a disclaimer, I've made a couple of minor edits to this article in the past (mainly copyediting and adding a map). Reviewer: Nick-D (talk) 00:24, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments

• The German capital ships are called both battleships and battlecruisers - pick one (the article on the ships uses, after much discussion, 'battleship' so that would probably be the best choice).
• The names of the British destroyers should be linked
• Why did 'poor weather conditions' delay the battle? (it might also be worth explaining just how bad the conditions were as these had an importance influence on the battle)
• Why did the action cease for 20 minutes at 6 am?
  • Can anything be added on this? Nick-D (talk) 07:59, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
    • The seas were so rough that the renowns foward turrets were occasionally flooded by breakers.XavierGreen (talk) 00:15, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
• "Despite the fact that the destroyers' fire was out of range, the Germans mistook Whitworth's smaller vessels for much more powerful ships and thought they were heavily out gunned" - the first half of this sentence doesn't match up with the second half (the use of 'despite' is confusing)
  • I believe i have fixed this.XavierGreen (talk) 21:08, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
• "Despite the Royal Navy winning a minor tactical victory over the Kriegsmarine, the Germans considered the engagement a success." - this seems contradictory: if the Germans considered the action to be successful, why was it a RN victory?
  • Strategically the Germans were victorious because they prevented whitworths squadron from interfering with the initial German landings. Tactically the Royal navy won because the German squadron was worse off in terms of damage and they forced the German squadron to flee to the open sea from an arguablely inferior force.XavierGreen (talk) 21:08, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
• "After the action had ended, Whitworth's force continued to search for the German capital ships. With Whitworth's force occupied" - this is a bit repetitive
• The coverage of the battle and its aftermath is rather brief - can more be said on this? The British official histories might have additional material, for instance.
  • The action itself was rather brief, i have reported the majority of what most reliable accounts of the action have. The Renown and Gneisenau were fairly inactive for about a month after the battle.XavierGreen (talk) 21:08, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
• Can photos of the ships involved be added?
  • Are any photos suitable for use in the article? Nick-D (talk) 07:59, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
    • Ive added a collage of the three capital ships involved.XavierGreen (talk) 00:15, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

• That all looks good to me. I'll pass this review now. Nick-D (talk) 08:14, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Assessment against GA criteria

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Looks like most of the issues have been addressed. Can this be confirmed? Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 20:01, 7 July 2011 (UTC)