Talk:French aircraft carrier Béarn/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Peacemaker67 (talk · contribs) 05:50, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This article is in good shape. Some comments:

suggest putting "Over the course of her long career, Béarn never launched her aircraft in combat" at the end of the Postwar service section and dropping the citation in the lead.
move link to beam to first mention
suggest lk=in rather than lk=on for "designed for a speed of 21 knots (39 km/h; 24 mph)"
link keel laying
suggest using either Marine Nationale or Navy consistently
45 officers and 830 enlisted men equals 875, not 865 (infobox)
the commissioning date in the infobox doesn't match the body
suggest linking Normandy
suggest "It was during this cruise that the drawbacks of the carrier's low speed became apparent. When operating with the fleet she had to turn into the wind to launch two aircraft and it took her an hour and a quarter at a speed of 16 knots (30 km/h; 18 mph) to rejoin the squadron, despite its low cruising speed of 12 knots (22 km/h; 14 mph)"
In addition, the primitive sandbag arresting gear
missing words "Later that the carrier cruised down the Atlantic coast of Morocco"?
"carrier's combat readiness"
suggest "to the PL.101, an improved version of the same aircraft."
say Laninon is at Brest
space in "Dewoitine D.376,a version"
suggest "its faith was borne out"→"its concerns were borne out"
"where the 155 mm guns had formerly been"
"2,210 for each 1.1-inch gun and 8,862 rounds for each Oerlikon" (commas)
"four-man Navy liaison detachment" US or French?
suggest "Demi-bBrigade" and link French Foreign Legion
Legionaires→legionaires, I assume this is the American spelling?
"arriving at the latter on 21 October 1945"
explain what the Dinassauts was, a bare link doesn't help

That's me done, fine job. Sorry about the delay, RW stuff piled up. Placing on hold for the above to be addressed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:30, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, mate. I was only concerned that its size might daunt reviewers, but you stepped up nicely.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 02:37, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good stuff. This article is well-written, verifiable using reliable sources, covers the subject well, is neutral and stable, contains no plagiarism, and is illustrated by acceptably licensed images with appropriate captions. Passing. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:46, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]