Talk:Japanese cruiser Tokiwa/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Parsecboy (talk · contribs) 16:12, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
One dupe link in the lead

Watch ENGVAR, I see armor and armour

I'd probably pipe the link to Steregushchiy so it matches the other ships mentioned in the article.

"Tokiwa was third of six when..." - I know you're talking about Togo's line, but most will not.
Added "in line", but I'm not sure if I should clarify that it's of the 2nd Division. What do you think?
You could also pipe line of battle in - though I saw another reference to this earlier in the article, so the link should probably go there.
Done.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:09, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
Probably ought to give some context on the arrival of the 2nd Pacific Squadron - otherwise, readers will assume it's the ships from Port Arthur and Vladivostok
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
File:Japanese cruiser Tokiwa.jpg - need a source for this
Could find a source on Google image, but I'm not to concerned about this since it's obviously a postcard.
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Thanks for looking this over; now I've got to go and make changes to all the other articles from which I copy-pasted major sections! I think that I've dealt with all your comments, let me know if there's anything that I missed.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:03, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]