Talk:Stern/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Sp33dyphil ^{"Ad astra"} 11:01, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

"the square or transom stern and the elliptical, fantail, or merchant stern[1] and were developed in that order" → " the square, or transom, stern, and the elliptical, fantail, or merchant stern[1], developed in that order"
"a sloped or 'cant'" → "a sloped, or 'cant'" there should be commas when words like or are present. Same with "round or 'circular' stern"
"In 1817 the British" comma after 1817.
"simply ugly-- no" ugly sounds really unprofessional. Is there a replacement?
italicise "Brandywine" in "USS Brandywine".

Transerm term

"In naval architecture, The term 'transom'" de-capitalise "The" and italices "transom".
replace hyphen with – in "1840-1920"

Elliptical stern and Cruiser stern

"this despite the fact that it left the rudder exposed and vulnerable in combat situations." → "despite the exposure and vulnerability in combat situations".
shouldn't there be inverted commas somewhere in "canoe stern, parabolic stern, and the double-ended stern"?
link "warships"
much of "Cruiser stern" in unsourced.

Other types of stern

"A The Constanzi stern is ~~a type of stern designed for use~~ used on ocean-going vessels"

References

FN 4 has a whole block of text linked. The title for it should be The shipwright's vade-mecum.
FN 8 is not formatted, ie no author, publisher, title, access date.

Added {{Wiktionary|Stern}}

Allow me to step in on this one since the original nominator seems to be missing. I need a couple of days though and I'll see what I can do. Brad (talk) 02:05, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am the nominator-- am swamped with work today and tomorrow, can address many if not all of these changes the day after that, thank you for reviewing it! KDS4444^Talk 04:35, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've done all I can do on this article. I requested a copyedit but they haven't shown up yet. Good luck. Brad (talk) 03:33, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have completed a copy edit. I have to admit I found the material difficult to understand and the descriptions difficult to visualise. Did my best --Diannaa (talk) 01:35, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What's the status on this review? Been on hold for some time and been a few weeks since the last comments. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 17:05, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to be bold and fail the article. Both the reviewer and the nominator have gone missing. There are still outstanding issues. Brad (talk) 21:13, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, good idea - well done. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:30, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]