CSS Wilmington has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: August 26, 2020. (Reviewed version). |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the CSS Wilmington article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA Review edit
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:CSS Wilmington/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Hog Farm (talk · contribs) 01:31, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
I'll get to this over the next few days. Hog Farm Bacon 01:31, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
- I guess the 290 Foundation got it's 50-pound donation for the image
- Indicate in the infobox that the length figure is length overall
- Maybe use 9 feet six inches in the prose for the beam, not 9.5 feet, which is a construction I don't see often in that usage.
- It's in a category about shipwrecks on the NRHP. NRHP listing is fairly significant (NRHP sites are generally consider to pass WP:GEOFEAT), so if this is true, the listing should be mentioned and briefly described in the prose, and mentioned in the lead, too.
- I think that's a mistake because Wilmington is in North Carolina, not Georgia.
Nice work. Gonna place this one on hold. Hog Farm Bacon 18:02, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
- I aim to please ;-) Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:28, 26 August 2020 (UTC)