Talk:Erzherzog Ferdinand Max-class ironclad/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: AustralianRupert (talk · contribs) 12:43, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

G'day, I have the following suggestions/observations: AustralianRupert (talk) 12:47, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Krupp appears to be overlinked
inconsistent: "Displacement: 3,588 t (3,531 long tons; 3,955 short tons)" (infobox) v "displaced 5,130 metric tons (5,050 long tons; 5,650 short tons)" (body of the article)
inconsistent: "123 mm (5 in)" v. "123 mm (4.8 in)"
inconsistent: "breech-loaders" v. "breechloaders"
"File:SMS Habsburg after 1877.jpg" - missing date field on the description page
"File:SMS Erzherzog Ferdinand Max after 1880.jpg" - same as above, suggest just adding an indicative date if an exact date is not known
"In commission: 1866–1886": this seems a little contradictory to the text which indicates that one ship remained in service (albeit secondary) until 1898, and the other remained until 1916. Did being consigned to secondary service come with official decommissioning?

Whoops, I was looking just at Erzherzog Ferdinand Max, which was stricken from the register in 1886 - Habsburg was still in commission until 1898. Looks like Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · contribs) took care of the rest, including years for the photos. Thanks to you both. Parsecboy (talk) 11:56, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
a (fair representation): b (all significant views):

It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
a (tagged and captioned): b (Is illustrated with appropriate images): c (non-free images have fair use rationales): d public domain pictures appropriately demonstrate why they are public domain: