Jump to content

Talk:HMS Implacable (1899)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleHMS Implacable (1899) 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 starHMS Implacable (1899) is part of the Predreadnought battleships of the Royal Navy 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
November 19, 2018Good article nomineeListed
August 23, 2020Good topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Good article

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:HMS Implacable (1899)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Peacemaker67 (talk · contribs) 02:02, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]


This article is in good shape. Just a few comments from me:

  • suggest "but with the same high speedas Canopus."
    • Done
  • there are rounding differences between the body and infobox for beam
    • Fixed
  • draft should be draught in the body
    • Good catch - one of the reasons I don't generally write a lot of articles on British ships ;)
  • the draught figures don't match between the infobox and body
    • Fixed
  • the displacement conversions are to LT in the body and T in the infobox
    • Fixed
  • the body doesn't support the number of shafts in the infobox
    • Added a bit on that
  • the kW conversions don't match between body and infobox
    • Fixed
  • the body says ten 12-pounders, but the infobox says sixteen?
    • Guess I should have looked closer at the infobox, eh?
  • where were the TTs, in pairs amidships on either side?
    • Burt and Conway's don't say - I'd assume bow, stern, and each broadside but I can't say for sure.
  • the belt conversions are rounded differently between the body and infobox
    • Should all be fixed
  • same for the turret, barbette and conning tower thicknesses
    • As above
  • just in general, the armour conversions in the infobox are in cm, but in mm in the body, which is a bit inconsistent
    • As above
  • suggest "The gun shields for her 3-pounder guns were removed the following year."
    • Works for me.
  • expand "scheduled coronation festivities" to state whose coronation? Reading it, I thought it might have been a monarch of Egypt.
    • Good idea
  • "the last two ships of the 5th Squadron to join the fleet" were these London and Prince of Wales, or Topaze and Diamond?
    • The former - Topaze and Diamond weren't part of the squadron - clarified this a bit
  • not just the Landing at Cape Helles, also the Landing at Anzac which were concurrent and it was also conducted by the British fleet. Perhaps drop "Landing at Cape Helles" at this point and introduce it a bit further on (see below)?
  • suggest "On the night of 24–25 April, soldiers transferred from the troopships to Implacable, Cornwallis, and Euryalus, for the Landing at Cape Helles. The ships then steamed..."
    • See if what I did in conjunction with the other change above instead works for you
  • the Second Battle of Krithia also involved British troops as well as ANZACs
    • Fixed
  • "Implacable, along with the battleships"
    • Good catch
  • File:Formidable class battleship diagrams Brasseys 1906.jpg needs a PD-1923 tag
    • Added.

That's me done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:45, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Parsecboy (talk) 14:39, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This article is well-written, verifiable using reliable sources, covers the subject well, is neutral and stable, contains no plagiarism, and is illustrated by appropriately licensed images with appropriate captions. Passing. Nice work! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:40, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]