Talk:French ironclad Provence

French ironclad Provence 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: August 15, 2020. (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.

Military history: Maritime / European / French

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

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

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Hog Farm (talk · contribs) 20:30, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vice admiral is overlinked.

And that's all I'm finding that needs done here for the GA criteria. It's well referenced to sources that all look reliable. The image licensings look okay, although I'm admittedly not a licensing expert. Prose doesn't have any issues I detected, it's neutral, AGF on any close paraphrasing of offline sources, nothing glaring missing. I'm going to go ahead and pass it now, I believe this is only the second time in 160-odd reviews I've ever passed something without any needed work. It clearly meets the guidelines, so I see no reason to put it on hold. Hog Farm _Bacon 03:30, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's nice to hear as I'm always surprised by what I've overlooked or forgotten to do.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 12:03, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]