Jump to content

Talk:HDMS Niels Juel (1918)/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: Peacemaker67 (talk · contribs) 08:15, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]


This article is in good shape. I have a few comments:

  • I've made a few tweaks, feel free to revert or further improve
  • HDMS needs some sort of explanation/note. What does it stand for? Perhaps something like what is commonly done for SMS?
  • should Nordland be bolded in the lead as an alternative name?
    • I never bother.
  • suggest "Like the precedingthat class" if that is what is being referred to.
  • "but was intended" is but the right word here? Perhaps "and"?
  • "eight 10.5-centimeter (4.1 in) guns?
  • "the main armament to 15-centimeter"?
  • displacement doesn't match between infobox and body
  • 50 millimeters
  • 10–20 millimeters
  • link flagship at first mention in the body
  • add a sentence explaining what happened with her between the German invasion and 1943
    • Source doesn't say other than she was training in 1943.
  • File:Niels Juel artilleriskib 1923-1943.jpg needs a publication date for the US PD tag
  • same for File:Niels Juel (1918) Plan.jpg
  • same for File:Niels Juel 1918 420.jpg
  • same for File:Niels Iuel attacked by German planes 29 August 1943.jpg
  • same for File:Nordland.jpg
    • Shit, I always forget that I need to meet all three bullet requirements for the URAA license. I'm gonna claim though that the diagram, as a government doc, doesn't need to be formally published, so we have to use date of creation which was, I suspect, was around 1922.

That's me done, placing on hold for the above comments to be addressed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:30, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Everything done except the pics which I'll do shortly. Thanks for the thorough review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:37, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Found a good pic.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:27, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Great, those images look fine now. This article is well-written, verifiable using reliable sources, covers the subject well, is neutral and stable, contains no plagiarism, and is illustrated by appropriately licensed images with appropriate captions. Passing. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:21, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]