Talk:HMS Llewellyn (1913)

Latest comment: 3 years ago by Zawed in topic GA Review

GA Review edit

This review is transcluded from Talk:HMS Llewellyn (1913)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Zawed (talk · contribs) 08:47, 16 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

I will review, comments to follow in next few days. Zawed (talk) 08:47, 16 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

Infobox

  • In the builder field, should recite the name in full. The way it is presented at the moment, it looks like it is part of a location.
    • Done.

Design

  • 105 long tons... starting a sentence with a number should be avoided. Zawed (talk) 10:57, 19 April 2021 (UTC)Reply
    • Done.
  • 24 hours during testing.?
    • Done.
  • Why is quote marks used around pom pom in the infobox but not in the text?
    • Different sources have both, but I have changed the text for consistency.

Construction

  • ...the 1912–1913 Programme...: probably need more context for the Programme
    • Done.
  • River Clyde mentioned here, but Clydebank in the infobox.
    • Reference to Clydebank removed as unnecessary.
  • Originally laid down as Picton, Llewellyn was renamed... since you have already established the original in the previous sentence, perhaps reword. May be: "The ship was renamed Llewellyn by Admiralty order on 30 September 1913,..."
    • Done
  • ...the first alphabetical class of the Navy... perhaps a bit more context here? I've read a few RN ship articles but this is the first I've heard of the alphabetical class.
    • Clarified and expanded.
  • On the The following day...
    • Done.
  • After returning to service,.... This implies she may have been damaged or refitted?
    • Clarified.
  • escortinged troop convoys to France
    • Done.
  • one of which struck the destroyer. need to mention that the bow was damaged as mentioned in the lead.
    • Done
  • without additional casualties. this would imply some casualties due to the torpedo strike?
    • Clarified.

Bibliography

  • Monograph No. 35 listed but not cited?
    • Removed.
  • Wrong dash style for the pg range in Newbolt.
    • Fixed.

Other stuff

  • No dupe links
  • Image tags check out OK.

That's my initial pass done. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 10:57, 19 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

  • @Zawed: Thank you for the review. Please check through my changes and tell me if there is anything else. simongraham (talk) 14:44, 21 April 2021 (UTC)Reply
  • Looks good, I made one small edit. Passing as GA as I consider that this meets the necessary criteria. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 10:22, 23 April 2021 (UTC)Reply