Talk:HMS Bonaventure (31)

HMS Bonaventure (31) 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: July 25, 2023. (Reviewed version).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the HMS Bonaventure (31) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

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

Military history: Maritime / British / European / World War II

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
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	World War II task force

Shipwrecks Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shipwrecks, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of shipwreck-related articles 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.ShipwrecksWikipedia:WikiProject ShipwrecksTemplate:WikiProject ShipwrecksShipwreck articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Shipwreck-related priority open tasks:

To Do

Lady Elizabeth (1879)
- Clean up typos Currently working on it-----Completed!
- Improve grammar
- Add any additions if needed Still adding more information
- Discuss desired additions -None

Scotland Low‑importance

	Scotland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics 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.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United Kingdom Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Copyright problem removed

One or more portions of this article duplicated other source(s). Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Yoenit (talk) 16:15, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

copyvio was introduced in the second reversion of the page, on 12:23, 22 December 2005. Everything between then and my edit should be revdelled. Yoenit (talk) 16:15, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Correction: Italian torpedo boat "Vega", not "Vaga". Could you please correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.122.12.38 (talk) 20:28, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:HMS Bonaventure (31)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Djmaschek (talk · contribs) 02:20, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Initial review

I plan to review this article. I will compile a list of issues. Please fix or argue your case for not fixing. Thanks. Djmaschek (talk) 02:20, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Review 1

Here are my comments. There will be a Review 2. Djmaschek (talk) 03:40, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction, paragraph 2: "helped to sink and Italian torpedo boat" (and > an, the word "to" seems unnecessary.)
Introduction, paragraph 2, last sentence: (Please give year of sinking.)
Design and description: (Draught 16 ft 10 in (deep load) does not match infobox draught of 14 ft. Can standard load be added to the text?)
Armament, fire control and sensors, and protection: (The Vickers Quad 0.5-inch are not listed in the infobox.)
Armament, fire control and sensors, and protection: (Space needed between Type 128A and ASDIC.)

Review 2

GA class. The ship's career is very well written and no errors were found. I added years to a few dates. Djmaschek (talk) 04:24, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well-written

(a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct:

(b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

Verifiable with no original research

(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

(b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

(c) it contains no original research:

(d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism:

Broad in its coverage

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic:

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

Neutral

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

Stable

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

Illustrated

(a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

(b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

Overall

Well-written
Verifiable with no original research
Broad in its coverage
Neutral
Stable
Illustrated