Talk:HMS Stratagem/GA1

Latest comment: 5 years ago by Sturmvogel 66 in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

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

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar):   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
    I've copyedited the article a bit, and now it's at a good prose standard. It complies with all the relevant MoS sections.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):   d (copyvio and plagiarism):  
    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.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused):  
    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'. It also only names one of Strategem's five different commanders listed in the Uboat.net source; they should all be listed if any is going to be.
    Good point, removed. Naming all the ships in a class with the same letter is a common naming practice, especially for the RN. See Ship class.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:23, 22 February 2019 (UTC)Reply
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
    The tone is appropriately neutral.
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:  
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  
    All the images are relevant and appear to have valid licenses.
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  
    Only one tiny detail, and this one will be ready for promotion! -Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 23:47, 20 February 2019 (UTC)Reply
    Fair enough removing the listed commander; the article would be more thorough if it discussed all of her commanders rather than none, but it doesn't appear that any were notable, so I think it works for GA. I retract my request for a comment about 'S'-names, so this article is promoted to GA!