Talk:HMS Nelson (28)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Nick-D (talk · contribs) 10:36, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Comments

I find this class of battleships to be very interesting, so I'll grab this review. I should be able to provide comments over the next few days. Nick-D (talk) 10:36, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

This article is in excellent shape. I have only the following comments:

• Could the first para of the 'Background and description' note when the ship was designed?
• Is it also possible here to note her intended role (especially given the unusual design): was she intended to be part of a battle line for a major fleet, or to fill more specialised or secondary roles?
• The photo of the model of Nelson is a bit under-whelming (especially due to the reflections on the glass case) - I'd suggest replacing this with a photo of the ship. A photo of her in her final configuration would be particularly useful.
• "was laid up in HM Dockyard, Portsmouth for repairs" - I'm not sure this is an accurate use of the term 'laid up' - doesn't this usually apply to when ships are placed in reserve?
• "Nelson became a private ship" - what's a private ship?
  • Link added.
• "Nelson departed Gibraltar on 31 October for England to begin a refit." - when did this conclude?
  • Turns out to have been much shorter than I'd thought.
• "Nelson was used around the Malayan Peninsula" - not really: she would have only operated off the west coast of the northern part of the peninsula. Nick-D (talk) 10:29, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
• For A-class, could more be said about the experiences of the crew? (was this a comfortable ship, were the captains OK, etc) Nick-D (talk) 10:30, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • If there were a biography of the ship available, I might be able to answer those questions, but as there isn't... Thanks for the review; see if my changes are acceptable.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:20, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
    • That looks good, but do we know what the ship was doing between October 1943 and June 1944? Nick-D (talk) 05:21, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
      • Not in any detail, presumably in position to react to an attempt by Tirpitz to sortie and then training for Normandy.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 13:09, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
        • If it helps, this website says she entered drydock for maintenance in November 1943, was on standby to counter German forces in December 1943 and early January 1944, then an assortment of training and maintenance activities until D-Day. From Hill To Shore (talk) 13:52, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
          • Sadly, that website's not reliable; I've found too many errors in it when checked against printed sources.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:18, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
            • OK. I'd suggest looking into this ahead of an ACR though. Nick-D (talk) 00:52, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Assessment

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

   AGF here as I don't have access to any of the sources: the text doesn't read like it was lifted from anywhere. Nick-D (talk) 10:29, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail: