Talk:Admiral Lazarev-class monitor

Admiral Lazarev-class monitor 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: November 3, 2015. (Reviewed version).

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.

A fact from Admiral Lazarev-class monitor appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 20 December 2010 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the Admiral Lazarev class monitors had their main armament replaced during their career, allowing them to remain among the most powerful ships in the Russian Navy's Baltic Fleet?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2010/December.

Wikipedia

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Admiral Lazarev-class monitor/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 22:08, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Will be happy to offer a review. I suspect this review will be somewhat short given how well written the article appears to be JAGUAR 22:08, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps, but be sure to ask for clarifications if there are bit that need further/better explanations.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:22, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Initial comments

"Four ships were ordered, but the last two were significantly modified and became the separate Admiral Spiridov class" - were they modified during construction? If so might be worth mentioning in the lead
"The Admiral Lazarevs were stricken from the Navy List in 1907 and 1909" - needs a "respectively" on the end
- I didn't actually name each ship, so respectively isn't needed.
"In November the committee decided" - November 1863?
"the two designs, whileAdmiral Chicagov and Admiral Spiridov" - space needed
"The monitors were ultimately designed to be armed with six 20-caliberObukhov 9-inch rifled guns" - another space needed here?
"The deck armor was in two layers with a total thickness of 1 inch" - I think "1 inch" could do with a conversion
- Converted on first use in the first section of the armor paragraph
There's no mention on their scraping in the Construction and service (feel free to ignore this)
- Covered, with a cite, in the table.

Thanks for looking at this.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:22, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On hold

A very solid article. I could only find a handful of minor prose issues but once they're all addressed then this should be good to go. I hope I haven't made any "newbie" misunderstandings! JAGUAR 13:11, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for addressing them! This is good to go now.

JAGUAR 22:09, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]