Talk:Japanese battleship Kongō/GA1
Latest comment: 13 years ago by Jim Sweeney in topic GA Review
GA Review edit
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Jim Sweeney (talk) 08:40, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars etc.:
- No edit wars etc.:
- It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
Comments edit
- What makes http://combinedfleet.com/360_45.htm a reliable source ?
- Same thing that makes everything else at combinedfleet reliable. All the authors are published experts in the field. This is a discussion that's been had at multiple levels on multiple occasions. Check the GA/ACR/FACs for Yamato class battleship, Japanese battleship Haruna, Japanese battleship Yamato or Japanese battleship Tosa for more details. Cam (Chat)(Prof) 17:32, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
- Ref 6 Jackson (2008) is not listed in the bibliography should it be Jackson (2000)
- Ref 14 McLaughlin, pp. 44–45 not listed in the bibliography
- As some references have the year of publication added it would look better if they all had them.
- Some of the books in the bibliography do not have locations and some use the cite book template and others don't for consistency they should all be the same.
- Malaya goes to a disambiguation page
- Not all the images have alt text
I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. --Jim Sweeney (talk) 08:47, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
- Passed --Jim Sweeney (talk) 22:58, 21 September 2010 (UTC)