Talk:Soviet destroyer Svirepy

Soviet destroyer Svirepy 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.
Review: January 16, 2019. (Reviewed version).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Soviet destroyer Svirepy article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Military history: Maritime / Russian & Soviet / World War II / Cold War

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
	Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force
	World War II task force
	Cold War task force (c. 1945 – c. 1989)

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

Soviet Union: Military Low‑importance

	Soviet Union portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) 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.Soviet UnionWikipedia:WikiProject Soviet UnionTemplate:WikiProject Soviet UnionSoviet Union articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Soviet destroyer Svirepy/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ed! (talk · contribs) 03:01, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Taking a look. —Ed!^(talk) 03:01, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria) (see here for this contributor's history of GA reviews)

It is reasonably well written:
It is factually accurate and verifiable:
Pass Offline references accepted in good faith. Cursory check of Google Books shows references that back up source material here.
It is broad in its coverage:
Pass Only spot a few suggestions.
- "Between 1942 and 1943 she remained in Leningrad, participating only in defense against air raids. " -- Was she part of a local garrison or was there some reason she was deemed unworthy of going to sea?
- "The destroyer transferred to the Leningrad Trade Port on 4 September and expended 127 130 mm shells between 21 and 23 September" -- This and the preceding lines aren't clear if these were defensive actions or the ship was involved in some kind of offensive; though I imagine this is immaterial to the average reader.
- Last graph, 4th Fleet and Baltic Fleet could add some general details about what they were up to in that time or the area where they operated as would add some balance to the scant details during the 12 postwar years of service, but this is only preference.
It follows the neutral point of view policy:
Pass Multiple references given an appropriate balance between them.
It is stable:
Pass No problems there.
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate:
Pass One image tagged PD where appropriate.
Other:
Pass I see nothing significant enough to hold the article up at this point, so just providing some outside suggestions. Well done as always. —Ed!^(talk) 03:52, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]