Talk:Japanese battleship Kawachi/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Dana boomer (talk · contribs) 20:40, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi! I'll be reviewing this article for GA status and should have my full review up shortly. Dana boomer (talk) 20:40, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   • Design - Do we have an article for the 1907 Warship Supplement Program? If not, is it a viable redlink?

   • No article and I think that an article is really only possible if you read Japanese.

   • Construction, "the battleship Mikasa had a fire was started by a sailor" - fire that was, I think.
   • Construction, "Kawachi at Yokosuka." - Kawachi was at, I think.
   • Construction, Battle of Tsingtao should be linked on the first occurrence, not the second.

   • Linked in the lede

   • Construction, do we have links for the First Squadron and Second Squadron?

   • No, and I'm not even sure that I can put together what ships were in them when.

   • Construction, "would delay the construction of one battlecruiser by over a year." Why would the salvage of one ship delay the construction of another?

   • Limited resources like money, drydock space and skilled labor are my guesses. The firmest of these is drydock space, I think, but even that's not noted in any of my sources.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

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 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):

   File:Kawachi.jpg needs a source. There appear to be a bunch of pictures on navweaps - perhaps one of them is the same as this?

   • Added.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   A few prose niggles and one image question. Otherwise a nice little article. Dana boomer (talk) 21:31, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

   • Responded to everything, I think. Thanks for the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:50, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

   • OK, everything looks good. Passing to GA. Dana boomer (talk) 20:05, 16 September 2013 (UTC)