Talk:Russian cruiser Bayan (1900)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Parsecboy (talk · contribs) 20:28, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
Watch ENGVAR - see "armoured" and "armored", "harbor", "defenses", etc.

"After providing naval gunfire support to the Imperial Japanese Army..." - surely she wasn't supporting the IJA in the RJ War?

I'd pipe the link to Strashnii - it looks out of place compared to the rest of the linked ships

Got what appears to be a missing link in the first line of the second para in the career section

Watch your spelling here: "After the death of Vitfeft during the Battle of the Yellow Sea on 10 August, Viren was promoted"

"She was subsequently trapped" - I'd recommend using the ship's name here
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
What's the difference between Corbett I and II? I only see one entry in the ref section.
Two volumes.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:05, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
Where did she go between 1912 and 1914? Laid up?
Not mentioned other than her refit in '13.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:05, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Was there any involvement in operations during WWI?
Other than the one training cruise, none.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:05, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
This isn't required, but you might want to turn Russian cruiser Bayan into an index page (or at least add a hatnote on this article to the later ship). Parsecboy (talk) 20:28, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. I think that I've caught all the AmEng'isms and otherwise dealt with all of your comments. Thanks for the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:05, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good now - I fixed the "Viren" mentioned above. Parsecboy (talk) 12:14, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]