Talk:French cruiser Chanzy

French cruiser Chanzy has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: September 23, 2014. (Reviewed version).

France Low‑importance

	France portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ships

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles

Military history: Maritime / European / French / World War I

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	European military history task force
	French military history task force
	World War I task force

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:French cruiser Chanzy/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Parsecboy (talk · contribs) 20:58, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
"198 December" - must have been a heck of a leap year ;)

"The ship began trials on 28 December before she was sent to Crete on 16 February 1897 as part of the French contingent of the International Squadron deployed there during the Greco-Turkish War to protect Western interests and citizens and remained with the squadron until 25 February 1898" - this is a bit too long. I'd probably split it after "interests and citizens".
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):
This has a more detailed account of her wrecking - don't know if there's anything there you want to include.

Warship 2013 references Chanzy and a deployment to Lesbos in the article about the destroyer Espingole.

According to this, Chanzy was to be reboilered in c. 1903 - do you know if this happened?
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:
As an aside, it looks like Chanzy was an unlucky name - the steamer SS Chanzy was grounded in 1896 and later wrecked in 1910 off Minorca.

Feron's article only says that Chanzy returned to the Levant on 30 October and remained near Mytilene until January 1902. These dates don't precisely match up with Caresse's account in Warship 2013 so I not sure if she was actually assigned to the squadron, which moved around quite a bit, or if she acted as guardship at Mytilene while the French occupied it. Without further clarification, I'm not willing to add that to the article. Thanks for digging up the court-martial info, my sources disagreed on the date of the grounding and, as it seemed pretty unlikely that the crew would remain aboard the ship for 9 days without it being recoverable, I went with the one that gave a later date for the grounding. Feron also doesn't mention any reboilering, so I'm not sure if it happened or not. I don't think that I would have wanted to be aboard either ship given their histories. Thanks for the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 02:35, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough on the Caresse/Feron issue - probably better to not muddy the waters with unclear information. Great work as usual. Parsecboy (talk) 11:57, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]