Talk:British S-class submarine (1914)/GA1
Latest comment: 23 days ago by Harrias in topic GA Review
GA Review edit
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk · contribs) 00:24, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
I'll take a look at this shortly. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 00:24, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
Prelim edit
- No relevant duplicated links
- Image correctly licensed
- Article is stable
- Earwig reports copyvio unlikely
Lede and infobox edit
- "upon its entry to the war"
- "All three were scrapped after the war, and stricken in 1919." this suggests they were scrapped and then stricken, which I don't think would be the case? Suggest something along the lines of "All three were stricken after the war in 1919 and scrapped"
- Remove the hyphens for F class and V class in the infobox
- Complement doesn't seem to be mentioned/cited in main text
Background edit
Design and description edit
- "in December 1911" no need to repeat the year here
- "S-class" remove hyphen (shan't repeat this!)
- A word or two of context as to why the S class is being compared to the British E-class submarine (that it's a contemporary design?)
- Link bhp
- Link bow
History edit
- Suggest changing to Service history, as isn't this whole article really history?
- Do we know why the extra vessels were ordered?
- I feel like the First World War should be mentioned a bit sooner than it first is
- Link North Sea (is this the main location in which S1 served?)
- Do we have any further details on service? They may have just been particularly useless or unlucky submarines, but I expected to read of at least one or two succesful sinkings/captures?
References edit
- References look good, AGF for print sources. I think if you take this article any further you will receive pushback on The Dreadnought Project.
@Harrias: Hi, my apologies in the delay getting to this. I will await your replies. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 17:31, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Pickersgill-Cunliffe: No problem at all, thanks for the review. I'm pretty snowed under at work at the moment, but will try to get to it as soon as I'm able. Feel free to poke me if I still to have forgotten about it! Harrias (he/him) • talk 22:12, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Harrias: Hi, have you finished with this or do you have more to go through? Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 19:57, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Harrias: Reminder ping! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 21:28, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
- My bad, looks like I covered off the easy stuff. Will try and have a look over the weekend and get the other points done. Harrias (he/him) • talk 22:07, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Harrias: Progress has slowed as you're clearly busy elsewhere. As such I'm going to fail this nomination for now. If you find yourself with more time later on and want to renominate, please give me a ping and I'll pick the review up again. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 14:38, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Pickersgill-Cunliffe: Thanks for the review nonetheless. This year has been crazy so far! Harrias (he/him) • talk 17:49, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Harrias: Progress has slowed as you're clearly busy elsewhere. As such I'm going to fail this nomination for now. If you find yourself with more time later on and want to renominate, please give me a ping and I'll pick the review up again. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 14:38, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
- My bad, looks like I covered off the easy stuff. Will try and have a look over the weekend and get the other points done. Harrias (he/him) • talk 22:07, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Harrias: Reminder ping! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 21:28, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Harrias: Hi, have you finished with this or do you have more to go through? Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 19:57, 29 February 2024 (UTC)