Talk:SMS Kaiser Wilhelm II/GA1
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 03:30, 3 July 2010 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose quality:
- watch your compound adjectives like 24-centimeter in the lead. Just add |adj=on if you're using a template. Shouldn't it be "the" flagship in the lead? And no 4th February, just 4 February. Might be worthwhile to add decomissioning dates to the career infobox, but that's your call.
- I fixed the convert template and the 4th Feb (probably something I missed when I rewrote the article) and added the date the ship was struck (I don't have a specific decommissioning date). Isn't it already "the flagship"? Parsecboy (talk) 10:36, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
- watch your compound adjectives like 24-centimeter in the lead. Just add |adj=on if you're using a template. Shouldn't it be "the" flagship in the lead? And no 4th February, just 4 February. Might be worthwhile to add decomissioning dates to the career infobox, but that's your call.
- B. MoS compliance:
- A. Prose quality:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. References to sources:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
