Talk:Russian cruiser Pallada (1906)/GA1
GA Review[edit]
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Starstriker7 (talk · contribs) 07:01, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
I'll take on this review. --Starstriker7(Talk) 07:01, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
Criterion 1[edit]
- The design and description section says that the Pallada was named for an earlier Russian cruiser. Should that be noted in the inbox?
- Both ships were named for Pallas Athena. This Pallada perpetuated the name, honoring the older ship.
- You never explicitly mention the the Pallada took part in World War I outside of the lead. It would probably best fit right before the second paragraph of the Service section.
- Good idea.
- I don't see why the Magdeburg shouldn't be wikilinked (and mentioned directly) in the lead.
- Done.
- It might be something of note to add that the Pallada was the first Russian ship sunk in World War I to the lead.
- Good idea. Thanks for the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:47, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
- No problem. Passing the article now. --Starstriker7(Talk) 15:21, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
- Good idea. Thanks for the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:47, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
Otherwise, all else fits in. The prose is clear and concise, the spelling and grammar correct; the lead and layout guidelines are well-met. No lists or fiction to worry about, no unnecessarily flowery language.
Criterion 2[edit]
Sourcing is pervasive and reliable (sourcing for statistics are not forgotten). I can't really check for original research, as the sources are offline, but I doubt that this is a problem.
Criterion 3[edit]
Both focused and sufficiently broad, when compared to similar GAs you have nominated.
Criterion 4[edit]
The article is written in a neutral and unbiased tone.
Criterion 5[edit]
Edit history checks out.
Criterion 6[edit]
The image's copyright status checks out. No caption is needed here, and it is relevant.
Overall comments[edit]
Nice work, Sturmvogel. After addressing the few nitpicks I have at top, I'll pass the article as GA. --Starstriker7(Talk) 07:41, 1 December 2011 (UTC)