Talk:Asama-class cruiser/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Parsecboy (talk · contribs) 12:55, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
One dupe link in the lead

The first line of the Armor section doesn't seem quite right to me - I might just cut the reference to the later ships.

The Pacific War section should be under the Service heading
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
Note the boilers are coal-fired
Implied since it's mentioned that they carry coal.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:38, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough.

On the reloading info - I assume that means the turrets had to be returned to the centerline to load?
Not exactly. They didn't need to do so until the ammo in the turret was exhausted.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:38, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, that makes sense - might be worth adding a note to explain that, but it's not a show-stopper.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
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):
File:Asama Brassey's.jpg - needs a US tag - the US-1923-abroad one should do.
Note that US-1923-abroad isn't a tag, but only a notice to replace it with PD-1923 and the appropriate overseas license.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:38, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I forgot Commons doesn't use that one. Parsecboy (talk) 20:50, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I might shift a couple images to the left for balance - maybe the postcard of Tokiwa in 1904 and the one of Asama in Australia.
I go back and forth on this issue and have generally been lining them up on one side or the other as I'm tired of people complaining about "ping-ponging".--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:38, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Thanks for the review and see if I've addressed everything to your satisfaction.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:38, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Looks fine now - the image placement isn't all that big of a deal. Parsecboy (talk) 20:50, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The lead image is going to be an issue—I believe it's copyrighted. If you click through to the source page, you'll see "Colourized Photos of old monochrome vessels. for inspiration only/ Copyright © 2007- 艦艇写真のデジタル着彩 Atsushi Yamashita. All Rights Reserved." Unless you can show that they were colorized by someone else before 1946, you'd have to find and use the original image, not the colorized version. :-\ Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 21:12, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Does adding color cross the threshold of originality, though? Parsecboy (talk) 22:26, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would—they're the one choosing the colors, after all. MCQ seems to agree. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 01:42, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]