Talk:HMS Vengeance (1899)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Peacemaker67 (talk · contribs) 01:59, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This article is in good shape. A few comments from me:

length differs between body and infobox
- Fixed
do you use normal or deep load displacement in the infobox? I thought it was normal?
- I usually use loaded if I only use one - figure that's more useful, as it's what the ship displaced in service
draft/draught
- Fixed
crew differs between body and infobox
- Fixed
ihp differs between body and infobox
- Fixed
where were the TT located?
- Added
"at a given weight" wouldn't it be thickness rather than weight?
- Fixed
perhaps link the main guns in the body?
- Good idea
bulkheads in the infobox are big to small, which is a bit weird, decks same
- Yeah, that is odd - I didn't go over the box closely when I rewrote the article, as you might have guessed.
did she have turrets or gun houses? body and infobox don't match for thickness either
- Corrected both
" Hong Kong in 1903–1904"?
- Fixed
"with the merchant ship SS Biter"
- Fixed
Orkanie is sometimes "Orkanie" and at another point just Orkanie. I think once you've identified it as the Orkanie battery, you could get away without the quotes
- Works for me.
"~~with~~while Vengeance and three"?
- Think I had meant to structure that as "...with V and 3 BBs providing covering fire" and forgot halfway through ;)
"She also took part" probably best to specify Vengeance here.
- Good idea
Kirithia should be Krithia
- Good catch
en route to Dover
- Fixed
I don't think File:Canopus class diagrams Brasseys 1906.jpg needs the 70y licence as we have PD-1923 (and we don't have an author date of death for it anyway).
- Added the author - it was originally published in the UK, so we do need the 70y PMA license.
other images look fine.

That's me done, placing on hold. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:47, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Peacemaker. Parsecboy (talk) 13:51, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No prob. 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) 01:01, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]