Talk:USS Minnesota (BB-22)

USS Minnesota (BB-22) 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: May 30, 2015. (Reviewed version).

United States: Military history Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Military history - U.S. military history task force.

Minnesota Mid‑importance

	Minnesota portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Minnesota, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Minnesota on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MinnesotaWikipedia:WikiProject MinnesotaTemplate:WikiProject MinnesotaMinnesota articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

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 / North America / United States / World War I / Operation Majestic Titan

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
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	World War I task force
	Operation Majestic Titan (Phase I)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:USS Minnesota (BB-22)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: West Virginian (talk · contribs) 17:03, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Parsecboy, I will engage in a thorough and comprehensive review of this article within the next 48 hours. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns in the meantime. Thanks! -- West Virginian (talk) 17:03, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

Parsecboy, I've completed my thorough and comprehensive review and re-review of this article, and I find that it exceeds the criteria outlined for passage to Good Article status. Prior to its passage, however, I have shared below some comments and questions that should first be addressed. It has been a privilege to review this article and I look forward to your feedback. Thanks! -- West Virginian (talk) 17:23, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Lede

Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section, the lede of this article adequately defines the ship, establishes the ship's necessary context, and explains why the ship is otherwise notable.
The info box for the ship is beautifully formatted and its content is sourced within the prose of the text and by the references cited therein.
The USS Minnesota (BB-22) image is released into the public domain and is therefore suitable for use here.
In the last sentence of the final "Lede" paragraph, I would include that broken up for scrap at the Philadelphia Naval Ship Yard, following its sale. I would wiki-link Philadelphia Naval Shipyard to this both in the lede and in the info box.
The lede is otherwise well-written, consists of content that is adequately sourced and verifiable, and I have no further comments or questions for this section.

Design

The image of the line-drawing of the Connecticut class has been released to the Public Domain in the U.S. and is therefore suitable for use in this article.
I suggest wiki-linking "displaced" to Displacement (ship).
This section is otherwise well-written, consists of content that is adequately sourced and verifiable, and I have no further comments or questions for this section.

Service history

The image of the Minnesota in June 1907 has been released into the public domain and is therefore suitable for inclusion here.
The image of the Minnesota at the Philadelphia Navy Yard, c. 1919 has been released into the public domain and is therefore suitable for inclusion here.
I suggest mentioning that the ship was specifically sent back to the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard for repairs following the explosion during World War I. If this is done, then you can de-link Philadelphia Navy Yard in the final sentence.
This section is otherwise well-written, consists of content that is adequately sourced and verifiable, and I have no further comments or questions for this section.

- All of your suggestions seem good to me, thanks for reviewing the article! Parsecboy (talk) 17:42, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - Parsecboy, thank you tremendously for your timely response to my review of your article. Everything here looks in order, and it is hereby a privilege for me to pass this article to Good Article status. Thank you for all your hard work on this article, as always! -- West Virginian (talk) 18:24, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]