Talk:German submarine U-335/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Ed! (talk · contribs) 16:29, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Giving a look. —Ed!^(talk) 16:29, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria) (see here for this contributor's history of GA reviews)

1. It is reasonably well written:

   Dab links, dup links, external links tools all show no problems. Copyvio detector returns yellow, based on similar phraseology in the "Design" section. Could the wording be arranged a bit more? This section is likely to be copied to other Type VII sections and so they in turn will return copyvio flags.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable:

   Pass Offiline sources accepted in good faith. Seeing other sources out there backing up info cited in the article.

3. It is broad in its coverage:

   • Cite 1 is resolving a Harv error.
   • Crew should be added in the infobox.
   • Infobox mentions mines, which should be included in the infobox as well.
   • Was the wreck ever located?
   • Given the ship's extraordinarily short history, I wonder if it might be worthwhile to see if this was one of the shortest careers of a German U boat, or if that information is tracked? Else it may be good to indicate other ships that were lost on their first missions in the war. Either way, given the article's short length (8 KB) much of it bolerplate class info, I do feel hesitant to pass outright without some additional context that would enhance the narrative here.
   • here is a bit of historic analysis of the U-Boat strategy at the time, with this sinking mentioned, that might be good to add.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy:

   Pass No problems there.

5. It is stable:

   Pass No problems there.

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate:

   Pass One image tagged PD where appropriate.

7. Other:

   On Hold Pending a few suggestions to increase the length a bit. —Ed!^(talk) 17:02, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

   @L293D: Just checking your thoughts on this one! —Ed!^(talk) 03:33, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

   I'm still on this (see my recent rewrite of the first section), it's just that I really don't have much time these days. L293D (☎ • ✎) 13:09, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

   Just checking back! Will have to remove this one from the queue in a few days. Thanks! —Ed!^(talk) 00:49, 24 March 2019 (UTC)