 | HMS Resistance (1861) 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: May 4, 2013. (Reviewed version). |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the HMS Resistance (1861) 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 |
 | A fact from HMS Resistance (1861) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 8 April 2013 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg)
.svg)
GA Review edit
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:HMS Resistance (1861)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Zawed (talk · contribs) 10:01, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Criteria edit
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
b (MoS):
- A few duplicate links: muzzle velocity, bulkhead, wrought iron
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- No citation errors noted.
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
- a (fair representation):
- It is stable.
- No edit wars etc.:
- No edit wars etc.:
- It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
- a (tagged and captioned): b (Is illustrated with appropriate images): c (non-free images have fair use rationales): d public domain pictures appropriately demonstrate why they are public domain:
- Appropriate tags used for images.
- a (tagged and captioned):
- Overall:
- a Pass/Fail:
- a Pass/Fail:
Only issue noted is with duplicate links. Otherwise, all good. Zawed (talk) 10:01, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
- All fixed. Thanks for the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 13:54, 3 May 2013 (UTC)