Talk:SM UB-2

SM UB-2 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.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
March 10, 2009	Good article nominee	Listed
February 8, 2010	Good topic candidate	Not promoted
March 15, 2010	Good topic candidate	Promoted
August 17, 2024	Good topic removal candidate	Demoted
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on March 12, 2009.
Current status: Good article

Ships

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles

Military history: Maritime / European / German / World War I

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	European military history task force
	German military history task force
	World War I task force

Germany Low‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:SM UB-2/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
What makes uboat.net reliable?
I initially had the same concerns about citing Uboat.net until I did a search for other works that have cited the website. I came up with the following through Google Books, listing only those where I could see an actual citation:
Atkinson, Rick (2002). An Army at Dawn: The War in North Africa, 1942–1943 (1st ed.). New York: Henry Holt & Co. ISBN 9780805062885. OCLC 49383747.

Conley, Tom (2007). Cartographic Cinema. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. ISBN 9780816643578. OCLC 73501932.

Lecane, Philip (2005). Torpedoed!: the R.M.S. Leinster Disaster. Penzance, Cornwall: Periscope. ISBN 1904381308. OCLC 74335239.

Treadwell, Theodore R (2000). Splinter Fleet: The Wooden Subchasers of World War II. Annapolis, Md.: Naval Institute Press. ISBN 1557508178. OCLC 43706924.

Whitlock, Flint (2007). The Depths of Courage: American Submariners at War with Japan, 1941-1945 (1st ed ed.). New York: Berkley Caliber. ISBN 9780425217436. OCLC 77503911. {{cite book}}: |edition= has extra text (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)

Wise, James E. (2004). Soldiers Lost at Sea: A Chronicle of Troopship Disasters. Annapolis, Md.: Naval Institute Press. ISBN 1591149665. OCLC 52182511. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)

Zuehlke, Mark (2008). Operation Husky: the Canadian Invasion of Sicily, July 10–August 7, 1943. Vancouver: Douglas & McIntyre. ISBN 9781553653240. OCLC 245556470.

There are probably more that are not visible via "Limited Preview" at Google Books. All appear to be major publishers, including one that's from an academic press. Some of the books have multiple editions; one has 23 different editions. — Bellhalla (talk) 11:29, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
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:
On hold. Well written, but with uboat.net being the dominant source of information, reliability must be established before the article reaches GA standards. Arsenikk ^(talk) 10:48, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the review. I've replied above to your note about sourcing. — Bellhalla (talk) 11:29, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. Though there are no rules for this type of situation, I will except uboat.net as reliable, and thereby pass the article. Congratulation! Arsenikk ^(talk) 09:29, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]