Talk:Feth-i Bülend-class ironclad

Feth-i Bülend-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.

Feth-i Bülend-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
Date	Process	Result
May 10, 2017	Good article nominee	Listed
January 7, 2019	Good topic candidate	Promoted

Current status: Good article

Military history: Maritime / Middle East

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

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	Middle Eastern 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

Former countries: Ottoman Empire

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country
	This article is supported by WikiProject Ottoman Empire (assessed as Low-importance).

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Ealdgyth (talk · contribs) 13:28, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be reviewing this article shortly. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:28, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Design:
- "limited by the Ottoman Empire's limited finances" - can we rephrase one of the limiteds here?
  - Good catch - sometimes I rewrite things too many times and forget to read through to catch stuff like that.
Characteristics:
- Any reason you didn't convert the 222 mm and 150 mm measurements in the last paragraph?
  - They're already converted earlier in the paragraph
Modifications:
- I assume that "9 kn" is 9 knots?
  - Yeah - I'll remove the abbreviation, as we aren't gaining much by leaving 3 letters off
Service history:
- "were laid up in Constantinople" do we have an article that we can link to to explain "laid up" for non-nautical people?
  - I usually link to wikt:laid up, but forgot here - how does that work for you?
- "she was disarmed to strengthen the defenses of the port" I think I understand what this means, but probably needs explaining in case of non-nautical readers.
  - See if how I reworded adds some clarity.
I randomly googled three phrases and only turned up Wikipedia mirrors. Earwig's tool shows no sign of copyright violation.

I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:18, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ealdgyth: - I think I've addressed everything you've mentioned. Thanks for reviewing the article, it's always helpful to have a non-nautical person shed some light on what I'm missing. Parsecboy (talk) 15:04, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. Passing this now. Sorry for the delay - hubby's "weekend" is Monday and Tuesday and we're usually pretty busy those days. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:57, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]