Talk:SMS Derfflinger/GA1

GA Review

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

GA review (see here for criteria)

This is your usual nice job, but it needs a few more tweaks than I can give it...in other words, expert info, not just grammatical smoothing-out.

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
you're struggling with the prose a bit. Often the objects should be the subject and vice versa. for example: two British convoys were intercepted and destroyed by ... should be German destroyers and battle cruisers intercepted and destroyed two convoys.... depends on the structure of the paragraph, but generally, you're discussing German ships doing something. When the
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
The badge of the ship interested me. Is there more to explain there? what the different quarters mean, etc.? Clearly the eagle, but the kitty-cats ? ;) what did all that mean. How was the crest used? Did sailors wear the patch on their jackets?
Staff's book has the badge in it, but does not explain any of the symbolism. There is an illustration of the ship with the badge on the bow, but that's as much as I've been able to glean. I did add that much to the caption (I couldn't find a place to put that in the prose that would flow well).
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
aye
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
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):
Two things here. Although you do have captions, they could be more informative. The picture descriptions in the commons gave me a better sense of what was going on in the photo. Second, I feel lost in the north sea, or the Baltic, or the North Atlantic or where ever we are. Although I realize most of the readers of these articles will have a basic knowledge of maritime history, I really could have used a general map. Is this possible?
I added a map of the North Sea, which is where all of the operations in which Derfflinger participated took place. Could you be more specific about the image captions? For instance, it was suggested that I cut down the caption for the map showing the German fleet units when I first used it (in SMS Von der Tann) and leave most of the details for the image description page. And for the two photos of the British BCs blowing up, I didn't want to repeat too much from the surrounding prose.
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
okay, so captions wouldn't stop me from passing this, but I do think the text could be smoothed out, more concise. I'd love to see something on the patch...that would make this a standout article, in my mind.Auntieruth55 (talk) 22:22, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for reviewing the article, Auntieruth. I've done about as much as I can tonight, reviewing the prose will have to wait until I get a bit of shut-eye. I'm afraid anything I tried to do might just muck it up even more :) Thanks again. Parsecboy (talk) 00:30, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I went through and tweaked a few things here and there, but I couldn't find anything that seemed too terrible, prose-wise. Probably just the difficulties of proof-reading something you wrote yourself, I suppose. Other than the one you pointed out above, are there any other glaring problems? Parsecboy (talk) 14:31, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I do think it's better. I tweaked a couple more parts, and I'll pass it on this. A map of the locations (with pins or something) would help, rather than just a general map of the North Sea. Whitby, Scapa Flow, etc. Something to work on before FA. :) Auntieruth55 (talk) 16:01, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]