Talk:Japanese aircraft carrier Shinano/GA1

GA Review

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

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   • The notation of the largest ship sunk to date, should be phrased in a less time-dependent manner. It would be better to use the {{as of}} template to note when the source said it was the largest sunk (even though it's unlikely that any larger ship will be sunk by a submarine any time soon).

   I removed it altogether (it wasn't in my draft, and I cut it when I first rewrote the page - and then someone added it back in)Cam ^(Chat) 23:50, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

   • The significance of the 1954 date for aircraft carrier size should be explained.

   It's in one of the footnotes. Cam ^(Chat) 23:50, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

   My apologies for overlooking it. :) — Bellhalla (talk) 04:08, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

   • Remove the word ironically from the sentence beginning Although Shinano was faster than Archer-Fish …. (See Wikipedia:PEACOCK#Don't peacock your facts for reasoning.)

   Cut that entire section - again, it wasn't in the original draft. Someone's been reverting my modifications, and it's beginning to aggravate me. Cam ^(Chat) 23:50, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

   • Also, for the same reason, mere from the sentence beginning While en-route… in the lead.

   Fixed. Cam ^(Chat) 23:50, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   • The paragraph beginning Shinano's existence had been concealed so effectively… has no citations. Also, did the source call Shinano a leviathan? If so, it would be best to attribute it, or reword if not.

   I also removed that sentence. Cam ^(Chat) 23:50, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Just a few prose issues and one referencing issue. I corrected some italicization and other minor MOS bits that would have taken longer to explain than to fix. — Bellhalla (talk) 19:55, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Looks good, so I'm passing the article. — Bellhalla (talk) 04:08, 10 February 2009 (UTC)