Talk:USS Blakeley

USS Blakeley 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: May 12, 2013. (Reviewed version).

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 / North America / United States / World War II

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
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	World War II task force

Pennsylvania Mid‑importance

	Pennsylvania portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pennsylvania 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.PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject PennsylvaniaPennsylvania articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

File:USS Blakeley ohne Bug.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:USS Blakeley ohne Bug.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests December 2011

What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 23:12, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:USS Blakeley (DD-150)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Tomobe03 (talk · contribs) 10:37, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 3a. broadness ()

3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

General comments:

The article links to three DAB pages: Fuel economy, Bulkhead and Draught (nautical) - the last one being a redirect to Draft DAB. Please adjust to correct targets.
External links are fine (no action needed).
No overlinking observed.

Images:

No problems whatsoever - licenses check out, captions are fine.

References:

No referencing problems either.

Stability/comprehensiveness/focus:

Criteria met.--Tomobe03 (talk) 20:00, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Prose review:

Is the first name of W. Brown, Jr unknown or is there another reason for use of the initial only?
- First name is unknown as far as sources go. —Ed!^(talk) 14:50, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - In that case, it is possible that the redlink is not warranted, but that is not for the GAR.
In At 08:30, she altered course to pursue a sound ping on her sonar., I assume that's half past eight in the morning. Perhaps "am" (or "pm") designation would dispel doubts that readers may have regarding this matter?
- Fixed. —Ed!^(talk) 14:50, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In The torpedo struck between framed 18 and 24 at about 4 feet (1.2 m) below her water line., I suspect that should be "frames" but I'm not familiar with ship construction, so I'm leaving it for you to correct me or that word.
- You're right. Fixed. —Ed!^(talk) 14:50, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In She was also fitted with newer weapons and electronics systems. what were those electronic systems? Just asking out of curiosity.--Tomobe03 (talk) 20:59, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- A newer radar. Added that. —Ed!^(talk) 14:50, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Since I found no disagreements with the MOS, i think there are no further issues to address except those already stated.--Tomobe03 (talk) 21:01, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your review! —Ed!^(talk) 14:50, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome. It was a pleasure and made an interesting reading material. Happy to pass this GAN.--Tomobe03 (talk) 15:03, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]