Talk:Battle of Heligoland (1864)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Peacemaker67 (talk · contribs) 08:03, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This article is in good shape. A few queries/comments:

consistency in how the war is described, in the lead and infobox it is the Second War of Schleswig, elsewhere it is the Second Schleswig War. I think the latter is where the article is, so probably that one?
- Good catch - those are from the article before I rewrote it
comma after Schleswig in the lead
- Done
by my count, only one historian states it was a strategic victory for the Austro-Prussians. I think the result should be stated differently in the lead, based on what is in the body, it appears that two historians consider it a Danish victory, one saying it was inconclusive, with only one claiming a strategic victory for the Austro-Prussians? Perhaps making the lifting of the blockade the main outcome, with the tactical result a lesser issue? I'm not sure about this, but it needs some tightening up in the lead.
- See if what I rewrote (and added to the body) works.
"it was also the last time Danish warships"?
- Good catch
Baltic Sea, Mediterranean Sea and gunboat are overlinked
- Fixed
"rendezvoused in Texel, the Netherlands in the North Sea" doesn't currently make sense. Is there a word or two missing?
- Dropped the "in the North Sea" bit
which three Prussian vessels?
- That was originally closer to the bit about the Prussian vessels being recalled, and I forgot to reword it when I moved things around.
"the Austrian and Danish commanders" I assume the Prussian commanders also cleared for action?
- Yup
maybe point out that Cuxhaven is at the mouth of the Elbe when it is first mentioned
- Good idea
perhaps drop the bullets in front of the commanders names, they seem incongruous
- Ok
the Preussischer Adler is described as an aviso and as a paddle steamer?
- It was both, though "aviso" is probably more relevant since that's more descriptive of what type of warship it was
all the images have appropriate licenses.

Placing on hold for the above to be addressed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:58, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks as always, Peacemaker. Parsecboy (talk) 23:14, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No prob. This article is well-written, verifiable using reliable sources, covers the subject well, is neutral and stable, and is illustrated by appropriately licensed images with appropriate captions. Passing. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:30, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]