 | HMS Drake (1901) 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: April 26, 2016. (Reviewed version). |
 | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg)
.svg)
Bitte die Verlinkung zu U-79 prüfen. U-79 wurde erst 1941 gebaut. --84.134.101.172 18:05, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Sorted. Benea 18:20, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Friedman p247? edit
Which book by Friedman is meant here, the 2011 one or the 2012 one?Nigel Ish (talk) 10:53, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
GA Review edit
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:HMS Drake (1901)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Wizardman (talk · contribs) 14:43, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
I'll review this shortly. Wizardman 14:43, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Here's what I found:
- "was arranged in casemates amidships." maybe it's obvious and i missed something, but not sure what 'amidships' means. If that's how midship/the middle of the ship is generally written then this can be ignored.
- No, that's actually a good point regarding jargon. I should have linked it.
- "The armour of the gun turrets and their barbettes was 6 inches thick while that of the casemates was 5 inches thick." in this case the single-digit numbers should just be written out.
- MoS says that numbers should be consistent in format within a paragraph and since I've got to convert a decimal in the last sentence...
- "The torpedo struck No. 2 Boiler Room" struck the
- Good catch.
Just a couple things to fix. Article is on hold and will be passed when fixed. Wizardman 02:54, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review. Feel free to do more! ;-)
The only other thing I could think of on a second look is to perhaps add the launch or completion date of the ship to the lead (whichever's more significant, which you'd know better than I). Not a big deal, but it is something I would think should be in there, or at least dates in general rather than beginning and ending with "around 1900". Besides that everything else looks good, so I'll pass the article. Wizardman 01:21, 26 April 2016 (UTC)