Talk:HMS Bedford (1901)

HMS Bedford (1901) 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: August 6, 2018. (Reviewed version).

Military history: Maritime / British / European

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
	British military history task force
	European military history task force

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

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:HMS Bedford (1901)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Peacemaker67 (talk · contribs) 02:54, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This article is in good shape. I have a few comments/queries:

what was her range?
- Not given.
her guns need the adj field added so they render as "6-inch" instead of "6 inches"
do we know where the TTs were positioned? Broadside?
the belt range in the infobox isn't covered in the body
the infobox says turrets and barbettes were 5", but the body says 4"?
link Ship commissioning for recommissioned?
should 3/5s be three-fifths per WP:FRAC?
"in the side of the boiler room"?
"began to improve her ordered"
suggest "items" instead of "things"
should it be "dismissed from their ship"?
- Ordinarily yes, but it's quoted that way in the source; a legacy of Georgian English, I expect.
the image is PD and has an appropriate tag.

That's me done. Placing on hold for the above to be addressed. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:24, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

- Thanks for looking this over. I think that I've addressed all of your comments, see if they suit.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 13:25, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - All good, I tweaked a couple of the convert templates. This article is well-written, verifiable using reliable sources, covers the subject well, is neutral and stable, contains no plagiarism, and is illustrated by an appropriately licensed image with an appropriate caption. Passing. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:15, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]