Jump to content

Talk:Avnillah-class ironclad

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleAvnillah-class ironclad 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.
Good topic starAvnillah-class ironclad is part of the Ironclad warships of the Ottoman Empire series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 18, 2017Good article nomineeListed
January 7, 2019Good topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Good article

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:Avnillah-class ironclad/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Peacemaker67 (talk · contribs) 04:37, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]


  • in Design, "limited by the Ottoman Empire's limited" perhaps change one to "restricted"?
    • Works for me
  • in Characteristics, where were the 75 mm QF guns mounted? Did she originally have a secondary battery?
    • The sources don't say, unfortunately.
  • suggest centring the Laid down and Completed columns in the table for consistent appearance.
  • link Constantinople
    • Done
  • worth pointing out in either the table or text that both Thames Iron Works and Samuda Brothers were in London, from the name, I assumed Samuda was a local yard until I followed the link
    • Good idea
  • which Gio. Ansaldo & C. yards were they rebuilt at?
    • Added
  • worth mentioning and linking/redlinking the two armored cruisers that sank Avnillah, I assume this information is available and they would be notable?
    • Good idea
  • suggest using the NHHC licence template for both images, along with PD-USGov-Military-Navy
    • Done

That's me done. Placing on hold for these points to be addressed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:28, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Peacemaker. Parsecboy (talk) 00:13, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No prob. This article is well-written, verifiable using reliable sources, covers the subject well, is neutral and stable, and is illustrated by appropriately licensed images with appropriate captions. Passing. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:08, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]