Talk:HMS Salmon (1916)

HMS Salmon (1916) 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: September 1, 2022. (Reviewed version).

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

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 I 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:HMS Salmon (1916)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Zawed (talk · contribs) 22:23, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I will review. This looks in pretty good order, just a few comments:

The beam dimension is inconsistent between text and infobox
- Thank you. I also noticed a discrepancy between the reported draught and that in the source which I also fixed.
The mm conversion for the 3 single QF also differs between text and infobox
- Template fixed.
I think when discussing the renaming of the ship, be more explicit that she was taking the name Sable from her sister ship, and the irony of it being the one she collided with. As it is presently worded, it feels the connection isn't strong enough particularly given the wording of the lead.
- I have expanded this so hopefully it makes it more clear, but I feel that this anecdote justifies a better writer than me.
Image tags OK
No dupe links

That's it for me. Zawed (talk) 22:23, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Zawed: Thank you for your excellent review. I have made the changes. I feel that there is a potential DYK in the Sable and Salmon saga but do not feel confident that I could create a good hook. If you feel it would be interesting, please feel free to take this on. simongraham (talk) 19:11, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Passing as GA now. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 10:14, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]