Talk:O'Brien-class destroyer/GA1

{{al|{{#titleparts:O'Brien class destroyer/GA1|-1}}|noname=yes}}
:This review is transcluded from Talk:O'Brien class destroyer/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Below is my review:

:GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.
2. :a (prose): {{GAList/check|yes}} b (MoS): {{GAList/check|yes}}
3. ::
4. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
5. :a (references): {{GAList/check|yes}} b (citations to reliable sources): {{GAList/check|yes}} c (OR): {{GAList/check|yes}}
6. ::
7. It is broad in its coverage.
8. :a (major aspects): {{GAList/check|yes}} b (focused): {{GAList/check|yes}}
9. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
10. :Fair representation without bias: {{GAList/check|yes}}
11. ::
12. It is stable.
13. :No edit wars etc.: {{GAList/check|yes}}
14. ::
15. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
16. :a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): {{GAList/check|yes}} b (appropriate use with suitable captions): {{GAList/check|yes}}
17. ::
18. Overall:
19. :Pass/Fail: {{GAList/check|yes}}

1. ::

:I tried hard, but really couldn't find any issues. It is frustrating when you cannot find a single mistake without being too nitpicky. The article is already GA-class just like the ship articles of the class. Cheers for brilliant Bellhalla. - DSachan (talk) 19:43, 31 May 2009 (UTC)