Talk:Japanese destroyer Ume (1944)/GA1
GA Review
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Nominator: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs) 18:00, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Simongraham (talk · contribs) 05:52, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
I have generally found the articles nominated by Sturmvogel 66 to be of high quality and this looks of a similar nature. It will complete my review shortly. simongraham (talk) 05:52, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
This looks in very good shape. Earwig reports a 3.8% chance of violation, which is very impressive. Spot checks confirm Stille and Sturton.
A few comments:
- Please change the numbers less than ten to words as per MOS:NUMERAL such as "5 additional".
- Suggest abbreviating "127-millimeter", "25-millimeter", "610-millimeter" etc.
- I generally prefer to spell them out. If nothing else than to remind people that they need to be hyphenated in that format.
- As there does not seem to be any guidance on this, I am happy to accept that argument.
- I generally prefer to spell them out. If nothing else than to remind people that they need to be hyphenated in that format.
- The final paragraph before the Battle of Ormoc Bay ends with "She would then..." Suggest adding a sentence to explain whether this happened in reality.
@Sturmvogel 66: Please ping me when you would like me to look over this again. simongraham (talk) 13:56, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Simongraham: Thanks for the review; see if my changes are acceptable.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:20, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Sturmvogel 66: Looks good. Nice to get a quick review. I believe the article meets the criteria to be a Good Article. simongraham (talk) 14:28, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Pass simongraham (talk) 14:28, 17 April 2024 (UTC)