Talk:French cruiser Condé/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Eddie891 (talk · contribs) 18:47, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I intend to review this shortly. Best wishes, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 18:47, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"for service with the battle fleet" can you link to something for 'battle fleet'? I doubt most readers will be familiar with the difference between a battle fleet and just fleet, if there is one, and our Battle Fleet article is about an American formation
"during the ~~on-going~~ Mexican Revolution" I think it's redundant here to say 'on-going'
"during the Allied intervention in the Russian Civil War" perhaps "as part of the..."

Good idea.

"evacuation of Allied withdrawal" I think there's an extra word here
"she continued to be used" perhaps add what she was used as?

If only my sources gave any details!

"used ~~by them~~ as a depot ship" I think that can be understood from the context...
"preceding Gueydon class by Emile Bertin" unclear if Bertin designed the Gueydon class, the Gloire class, or both

He designed both, but that's not really important. See if my change is acceptable.

"Their crew numbered 25 officers and 590 enlisted men" perhaps "They were crewed by 25 officers and 590 enlisted men" to eliminate confusion about whether that was the crew for the whole class or each ship

Given that all the preceding info applied to each individual ship, I don't think that that's likely.

"intended to give them" perhaps you mean 'her' given that you just mentioned the ship individually?

Good idea.

"after Gloire vacated the" I don't think you mention a 'Gloire' ship previously?
"the British Admiralty all its available cruisers" word missing?
"interned merchant ships" were they German merchant ships?
"the division had been renamed the Atlantic Division" to fit with the sentence, I suggest 'was renamed'

I think that "had been" is past perfect tense which is appropriate for something that had occurred in her absence and before her return.

"176 mutineers from French colonial infantry" is there a particular mutiny that could be linked and mentioned?

I can't tease out this specific mutiny from the much more prominent 1917 Nivelle and the 1919 Black Sea Mutinies.

Very minor prose comments from me, all subjective and open to discussion. Best wishes, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 18:02, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing-wise, what makes naval-history.net a reliable source? All sourcing lines up based on a spot-check. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 00:02, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ordinarily, I avoid it, but it does have a section that are scans and transcriptions of ship's logs. A primary source, I know, but acceptable in this usage.

Earwigs suggests no coypvio. Placing on hold for minor minor comments to be addressed. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 00:02, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sturmvogel 66: Sorry if I'm coming off as a bother, but could you just confirm here that you've addressed all my comments (for posterity)? Looking at the article it seems as though you have. Best wishes, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 13:30, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Eddie891: No bother, I have taken care of them all.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:53, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sturmvogel 66, Sorry, just one more thing: File:Gloire class cruiser diagrams Brasseys 1912.jpg needs a PD-US tag Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 16:23, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Eddie891: Good catch, I didn't even think to check.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:47, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. This article is now well written, referenced, neutral, comprehensive, illustrated, contains no copyvio, and otherwise meets the GA criteria. Passing. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 16:56, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]