Talk:Italian ironclad Lepanto

Italian ironclad Lepanto 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: February 4, 2016. (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 / European / Italian

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
	European military history task force
	Italian military history task force (c. 500–present)

Photo[edit]

here. Parsecboy (talk) 18:24, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And here. Parsecboy (talk) 18:44, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Italian ironclad Lepanto/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 17:23, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Grabbing this for a review shortly. Miyagawa (talk) 17:23, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As I suspected, this is much the same good quality as the other Ironclad articles I've previously reviewed of yours! As it stands, I can't seen anything to prevent it from being promoted. All areas are covered, it is fully cited, images are good (with appropriate licences) and sources are also good. So, I'm happy to promote. Miyagawa (talk) 19:06, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]