Jump to content

Talk:SMS Blücher (1877)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleSMS Blücher (1877) 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.
Good topic starSMS Blücher (1877) is part of the Screw corvettes of Germany series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 5, 2018Good article nomineeListed
October 12, 2019Good topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Good article

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:SMS Blücher (1877)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Courcelles (talk · contribs) 18:47, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]


  • Is "cruising radius" the correct term?
  • Speaking of range, why is it given at 9 knots in the prose and at 10 knots in the infobox?
    • Good catch, I hadn't checked the infobox when I finished expanding the article - when it was created, apparently the box for Bismarck was copied to all of the ships of the class, though there were small differences between each one - I'll have to be sure to fix the others when I get to writing them.
  • I think I'd rather see a direct source for "In the years that Blücher was in service, the majority of German naval officers and enlisted men received their torpedo training aboard the ship, though she did not actually begin training new crews until 1 May 1881." given the "majority" language.
    • It's covered by the cite to Hildebrand et. al.
  • "On 27 October, Blücher was decommissioned following the end of the annual training maneuvers." When was she recommissioned?
    • Hildbrand et. al. don't say - normally they're pretty good about covering the commission/decommission dates, but for whatever reason they did not include that one.
  • This looks really good. Courcelles (talk) 20:54, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]