Talk:Zara-class cruiser (1879)/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Iazyges (talk · contribs) 15:08, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
Will start soon. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 15:08, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
- As far as I can see, the article fits the "Immediate Pass" bill; some prose suggestions are offered, but the prose is already understandable, so it is passable. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 18:06, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
Criteria
[edit]GA Criteria
|
---|
GA Criteria:
|
- No DAB links
- No Dead links
- Images appropriately licensed
Prose Suggestions
[edit]- "Despite the lengthy design process, the ships proved to be failures in service, primarily the result of their low speed." perhaps "primarily as a result of their low speed" or " primarily because of their low speed"
- Works for me.
- " As a result of her different hull, Sebenico is sometimes not included in the Zara class." More of a personal question, but is it mentioned if she is considered her own class, or part of a different class? -- Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 18:12, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
- Conway's and Greger both list her as a unique type. Thanks for these two reviews, Iazyges. Parsecboy (talk) 18:25, 5 September 2017 (UTC)