Talk:Japanese battleship Hiei/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Parsecboy (talk) 12:51, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   In the 1914-1929 section, you say that the ship was placed in reserve in 1920 but then conducted a cruise of China in 1919. This should be in chronological order.

   Done. Cam ^(Chat)(Prof) 16:26, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

   I think there are some Engvar issues; ex: armour but demilitarization.

   I'll do my best to fix these. Canadian English is really a bastardized hybrid between AmEng and BritEng, which makes copyediting a pain. Cam ^(Chat)(Prof) 16:26, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

   Yeah, I know Canadian English is sort of a mix of the two, but I wasn't sure what was what. Parsecboy (talk) 17:40, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

   The last para is really long, could you split that somewhere?

   I was thinking the same thing yesterday. I'll try and find somewhere where it can be split. Cam ^(Chat)(Prof) 16:26, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

   Oh, I had thought of this during my initial review but then forgot to list it here. You should link to armor-piercing shot and shell in the armament section. Parsecboy (talk) 17:40, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

   I guess there's no reason I couldn't do this myself. Parsecboy (talk) 17:43, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   There are a couple fact tags that need to be fixed - should be no problem though.

   Fact tags have been fixed. Cam ^(Chat)(Prof) 16:26, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   You might want to explain the bit about sinking the Imperator Nikolai I though (i.e,. explain that it had been taken into Japanese service and then sunk as a target). I imagine it's not clear now to non-experts what was going on there.

   Alright. I've added a bit. Cam ^(Chat)(Prof) 16:26, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

   You should spell out the connection between WWI and the Washington Treaty (people might read it and think "what? WWI was over 5 years before the WNT"). Also add when the treaty was signed (a year is fine, I think).

   Done. Cam ^(Chat)(Prof) 16:26, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

   I expect this is a typo, but in the demilitarization section, you say "at the end of November 1939. On 24 April 1930," That should be November 1930, right?

   November 1929. Not sure what that 3 was doing in there...Cam ^(Chat)(Prof) 16:26, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

   I'm always amazed at the seemingly obvious typos I continually make... Parsecboy (talk) 17:40, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. 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):

   Is there a source for File:HieiB17Nov13.gif - anyone should be able to tell it's a USAF photo, but it'd be nice to have the source.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Not too much to do here before I'll pass the article for GA. Excellent work. Parsecboy (talk) 12:51, 19 August 2010 (UTC)