Talk:Russian ironclad Sevastopol

Russian ironclad Sevastopol 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: June 29, 2013. (Reviewed version).

A fact from Russian ironclad Sevastopol appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 6 October 2012 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the Russian ironclad Sevastopol was converted into an ironclad while still under construction in the 1860s?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2012/October. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Russian ironclad Sevastopol.

Wikipedia

Military history: Maritime / Russian & Soviet

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force

Ships

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles

Russia: Technology & engineering / Military Low‑importance

	Russia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the technology and engineering in Russia task force.
	This article is supported by the Russian, Soviet, and CIS military history task force.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

GA Review

Latest comment: 10 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

This review is transcluded from Talk:Russian ironclad Sevastopol/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Dank (talk · contribs) 00:31, 28 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Review

The toolbox checks out.
"an 32-gun": a 32-gun
"; four on the upper deck as chase guns and 28 on the lower deck.": sentence fragment; change the semicolon to a comma
"two gun": two guns
"her armament was changed again and now consisted of fourteen": "... changed again, to fourteen".
- I didn't like the comma after again and went with: "In 1877, her armament was changed again to 14 eight-inch guns".
"that reduced": "reduced" isn't impossible in this sense, but it's a little uncomfortable. How about "that narrowed"?
"All dates used in this article are Old Style": period needed.
"Robert Gardiner": "Gardiner, Robert"
Otherwise:

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
- Dank (push to talk) 00:47, 28 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

All done, thanks for the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:43, 29 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Passed. - Dank (push to talk) 20:47, 29 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Add topic