Talk:French battleship Vergniaud/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Rp0211 (talk · contribs) 05:26, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):
b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
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):
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):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Infobox

No issues

Lead

No issues

Design and description

No issues

Career

Fix disambiguation issue with "naval review" according to this
- The definition's on the disambig page, about halfway down. Thanks for the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:41, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Legacy

Since there is only one sentence in this section, I would get rid of this section and put the information in the "Postwar career" subsection
- Done.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:43, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notes

No issues

Bibliography

No issues

After thoroughly reviewing this article, I have decided to put it on hold at this time. I will give you the general seven days to fix these mistakes and/or address issues which you believe do not affect good article status. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask. Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 19:31, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since all issues have been addressed, I feel confident passing this article. Congratulations and keep up the good work! Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 00:10, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]