Talk:HMS Mindful (1915)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:HMS Mindful (1915)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Zawed (talk · contribs) 23:11, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

I will review this one, comments to follow in due course. Zawed (talk) 23:11, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Lead

• The M class were an improvement on the previous L-class...: suggest either "The M class destroyers (or ships) were an improvement on those of the previous L-class..." or "The M class was..."
  • Amended.
• ...jointly sinking the German...: having read the portion of the article that deals with this action, I think it is better to say "helped sink" rather than jointly (which I read as two ships being involved).
  • Good spot.

Design and development

• ...the greater performance was appreciated...: suggest, for greater specificity, "the greater performance of the M-class was appreciated".
  • Happy to add.

Construction and career

• ...the name had been used in the Royal Navy.: I may be overthinking this, but to me it seems this should be "by the Royal Navy."
  • No problem. I have amended that.
• I'm pretty certain you would have included it if known, but for sake of completeness, I have to ask: is the name of the captain, or any of her captains, known?
  • I have some names, but no one that seems of significance.
• At 6:29 PM, the destroyer...: the construction of this section, particularly the starting sentence, suggests that this is still 30 May, but I think it may have been the following day?
  • Good spot.
• so did not follow Faulkner.: typo in the ship's name here.
  • Another good spot.
• ...was sold to Cohen...: needs more context as to who/what Cohen is.
  • G. Cohen is a shipbreaker. I have added the initial.

Other stuff

• Sources themselves look OK. However, doing some source checks, I can't see that cite 12 supports the point that V48 specifically was the ship destroyed, and that the Shark was involved. The source just refers to a destroyer being sunk, not a torpedo boat. Cites 16 and 18 also checked and support the material that they are used for - however, in the case of the former I feel it may be worthwhile adding where the action took place and that the sub had already attacked a trawler.
  • Well noted. The Royal Navy used the term destroyer for the German torpedo boats. I have added another reference that mentions the names of the other vessels explicitly. I have also added the detail for the action on 20 August.
• Image tags check out OK
• No dupe links

A nice solidly put together article otherwise. Zawed (talk) 03:32, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

• @Zawed: Thank you for your kind words and excellent review. I think I have addressed your concerns. simongraham (talk) 21:05, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

This looks all good. I'm passing as GA as I believe that the article meets the necessary criteria. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 09:45, 27 June 2022 (UTC)