Jump to content

Talk:German torpedo boat T35/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: CPA-5 (talk · contribs) 12:55, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Claim!!! My turn to review one of those ships. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 12:55, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • was allocated to the United States after the war Unlink the US.
  • ships a maximum speed of 33.5 knots (62.0 km/h; 38.6 mph) Is it posible to round the nought? Also unlink km/h and mph.
    • Unlinked, not possible to get rid of the trailing oughts in multi-unit conversions unless both of them have a trailing ought.
  • together with eight 2 cm (0.8 in) C/38 guns Shouldn't it be ".8 in"?
    • The leading ought helps people from missing the decimal point.
  • against advancing Soviet forces near Cranz Pipe Soviet to the Soviet Union.
  • The boat was allocated to the United States when the Allies divided Unlink the US and link Allies.
  • heavy cruiser is overlinked.
  • No links for both FuMO and FumB in the article?
    • Forgotten that I'd created an article on the FuMO 21 radar. Nothing particular on the German radar detectors so I just used a generic link.

Infobox

  • "1,294 t (1,274 long tons) (standard)" Link both tonnes.
  • "32,000 shp (24,000 kW)" Link kW.
  • The body doesn't use shafts of the infobox?
  • "33.5 knots (62.0 km/h; 38.6 mph)" Is it posible to round the nought?
  • "1 × quadruple, 2 × twin 2 cm (0.8 in) AA guns" Shouldn't it be ".8 in"?
  • No armour?
    • Nope. Little boys like destroyers and smaller generally don't have any armor.
  • No edit wars.

Sources

  • Rohwer's title should be "Chronology of the War at Sea, 1939-1945: The Naval History of World War II" Unless your edition says something else?
    • My copy spells out "Two"
  • No ORs.
  • The sources are reliable and are academic.

Image

  • Looks fine to me.

That's anything from me. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 12:05, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review, CPA.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 11:34, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]