Login
Login

Talk:HMS Simoom (P225)/GA1

GA Review

{{Good article tools}}

{{al|{{#titleparts:HMS Simoom (P225)/GA1|-1}}|noname=yes}}
:This review is transcluded from Talk:HMS Simoom (P225)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Bryanrutherford0 (talk · contribs) 15:59, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

  • The nominators have done such good work preparing this series of articles, I'll just go ahead and review them all. Reviews should be up in the next few days. -Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 15:59, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

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

  1. It is reasonably well written.
  2. :a (prose, spelling, and grammar): {{GAList/check|y}} b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): {{GAList/check|y}}
  3. :: I've copyedited the article a bit, and now it's at a good prose standard. It complies with all the relevant MoS sections.
  4. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
  5. :a (reference section): {{GAList/check|y}} b (citations to reliable sources): {{GAList/check|y}} c (OR): {{GAList/check|y}} d (copyvio and plagiarism): {{GAList/check|y}}
  6. :: I'll have to AGF on the offline book sources, but online sources appear to confirm the substance of the article. Uboat.net isn't necessarily a reliable source, but it claims that its details come from the British National Archives, and I guess I'm willing to accept that.
  7. It is broad in its coverage.
  8. :a (major aspects): {{GAList/check|y}} b (focused): {{GAList/check|y}}
  9. :: The article seems to cover all the major aspects of the topic (design, construction, service history), and doesn't get lost in any excessive detail. It's a minor detail and might seem obvious, but I wish the text that discusses the boat's name pointed out that all the S-class subs were given names that begin with 'S'.
  10. :::It's a common naming practice, especially for the RN. See Ship class.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:17, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
  11. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
  12. :Fair representation without bias: {{GAList/check|y}}
  13. :: The tone is appropriately neutral.
  14. It is stable.
  15. :No edit wars, etc.: {{GAList/check|y}}
  16. ::
  17. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
  18. :a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): {{GAList/check|y}} b (appropriate use with suitable captions): {{GAList/check|y}}
  19. :: All the images are relevant and appear to have valid licenses.
  20. Overall:
  21. :Pass/Fail: {{GAList/check|y}}
  22. :: Only one tiny detail, and this one will be ready for promotion!
  23. :::Given the discussion at the other S-Class subs, I retract my comment about 'S'-names, and this article is promoted! -Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 00:30, 23 February 2019 (UTC)