Talk:Japanese destroyer Take (1944)
Latest comment: 1 month ago by Djmaschek in topic GA Review
Japanese destroyer Take (1944) 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 6, 2024. (Reviewed version). |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Japanese destroyer Take (1944) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA Review edit
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Japanese destroyer Take (1944)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs) 09:18, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Djmaschek (talk · contribs) 01:31, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Initial review edit
After a quick read, the article looks good. A more thorough review will follow shortly. Djmaschek (talk) 01:31, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Review 1 edit
GA class = Passed. After writing up the review, I decided to make the changes listed in the last 3 bullet points because they were so minor. Djmaschek (talk) 02:17, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Well-written. Done But please see my notes below.
- Verifiable. Done
- Broad coverage. Done
- Neutral. Done
- Stable. Done
- Illustrated. Done
- Specs in text match those in infobox. Done
- Construction and career, paragraph 3: This is written correctly. However, when I read it, I was confused by the fact that TA-4 went first followed by TA-3. So, I had to reread it carefully. My suggestion is to change "the troop ships" to "the TA-4 troop ships". This should clear up any confusion in readers like me.
- Construction and career, paragraph 4, sentences 6, 7 & 8: The tense suddenly changes from past to present tense. There are 3 words "is" that need to be changed to "was" and one "are" that needs to be changed to "were". (convoy is; are sunk; is badly; Take is not.)
- Construction and career, paragraph 5: USS Cooper needs a hyperlink.